Charlton Heston wants long-gun registry scrapped...

[scribblet]

Did anyone see this today, no big surprise, the CBC's agenda is showing again.

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/09/21/15430071.html

OTTAWA — The Conservative Party is alleging the CBC purposefully misled viewers by airing a report that, it said, suggests the National Rifle Association was helping them abolish the long-gun registry.

Jenni Byrne, the party’s head of political operations, wrote CBC Ombudsman Vince Carlin last week over what she said was concern by the public broadcaster’s “blatant agenda-driven reporting."

“During its nightly newscast, the CBC reported that the National Rifle Association (NRA), a U.S. third party advocacy group, is behind efforts by some Canadian lawmakers to abolish the long-gun registry...Yet shockingly, the CBC does not provide any evidence to connect the Government of Canada, the Conservative party and any U.S. advocacy group,” Byrne wrote. “Conspiracy theory journalism with a clear political agenda is not an appropriate practice for Canada’s national broadcaster.”

Byrne’s alleges the CBC was also in cahoots with the Liberals because some of its MPs came out flying with similar accusations after the broadcast.

Carlin said he received 11 complaints about the item.

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/09/21/15430071.html

[Wild Bill]

I have given specifics, you just disagree they will work.

So why don't you defend your specifics? Tell me HOW my objections are wrong and HOW your specifics actually will work!

Isn't that how debate is supposed to work? Do you expect to just toss some ideas out and if someone pokes holes in them you just walk away?

[Wild Bill]

Did anyone see this today, no big surprise, the CBC's agenda is showing again.

After the Liberal gun registry is gone perhaps the CBC should be the next target! Certainly, they have no right to be surprised that they are losing friends in the CPC. If you kick a dog you're a fool to complain if it bites you.

[capricorn]

Did anyone see this today, no big surprise, the CBC's agenda is showing again.

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/09/21/15430071.html

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/09/21/15430071.html

Speaking of the CBC, here's a good one.

Weeks of high-pressure negotiations, cajoling and arm-twisting will come to a peak on Wednesday when Members of Parliament vote on a Liberal motion to defeat a Conservative backbencher's private member's bill to repeal the 15-year-old gun registry.

The vote is slated for 5:45 p.m. ET.

The Liberals — under orders from their leader Michael Ignatieff — and the Bloc Québécois are poised to vote to halt Tory MP Candice Hoeppner's bill. The Conservatives are set to support the bill, meaning the fate of the registry lies with the NDP, which allows its MPs to vote however they want on private member's bills.

Six NDP MPs who initially voted to repeal the registry have now said they will vote to keep it.

With the backing of enough NDP MPs, it appears the Liberal motion will pass 153-151.

On Tuesday night, during an hour of debate on the Liberal motion, Hoeppner made one last pitch to change some minds.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/09/22/gun-registry-vote.html

Er, the 5:45 vote is on Hoeppner's bill to kill the LGR, not on a Liberal motion.

[scribblet]

Speaking of the CBC, here's a good one.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/09/22/gun-registry-vote.html

Er, the 5:45 vote is on Hoeppner's bill to kill the LGR, not on a Liberal motion.

Strange the CBC getting something like that wrong gee

[eyeball]

So why don't you defend your specifics? Tell me HOW my objections are wrong and HOW your specifics actually will work!

Not until you answer a question I've asked you for weeks now.

How will stiffer sentencing deter a killer that intends to kill himself?

Isn't that how debate is supposed to work? Do you expect to just toss some ideas out and if someone pokes holes in them you just walk away?

I expect a simple answer to a simple question so I can carry on with the debate.

[waldo]

Speaking of the CBC, here's a good one.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/09/22/gun-registry-vote.html

Er, the 5:45 vote is on Hoeppner's bill to kill the LGR, not on a Liberal motion.

Strange the CBC getting something like that wrong gee

strange that both capricorn and scribblet... got something... got this wrong - that the CBC most certainly is correct in this regard; that the linked and quoted CBC article most certainly is correct in stating that, "Members of Parliament vote on a Liberal motion to defeat a Conservative backbencher's private member's bill to repeal the 15-year-old gun registry".

- on June 9, Liberal MP Marc Holland (Ajax—Pickering, ON), moved the second report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security => the report that concluded, that presented: "In accordance with its Order of Reference of Wednesday, March 3, 2010, your Committee has considered Bill C-391, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (repeal of long-gun registry), and agreed on Thursday, June 3, 2010, to report the following:

That this Committee, pursuant to Standing Order 97.1 (1), recommends that the House of Commons do not proceed further with Bill C-391, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (repeal of long-gun registry), because the Committee has heard sufficient testimony that the bill will dismantle a tool that promotes and enhances public security and the safety of Canadian police officers.

- on Jun 15, the Speaker of the House, Peter Miliken, informed the House, "that under the provisions of Standing Order 97.1(2) I am designating Tuesday, September 21, 2010, as the day fixed for the consideration of the motion to concur in the second report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.

The report contains a recommendation not to proceed further with Bill C-391, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (repeal of long-gun registry)."

- on Sept 21, Conservative Deputy Speaker, Andrew Scheer, ordered that, "Pursuant to Standing Order 97.1(2) the motion to concur in the second report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security (recommendation not to proceed further with Bill C-391, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (repeal of long-gun registry) presented on Wednesday, June 9, 2010 is deemed to be proposed"

[M.Dancer]

Eyeball, could you give us a gun control plan WITH SPECIFICS that would WORK to prevent more wingnuts like Lepine?

So far all we've heard is wishes and things that obviously won't work, given that anyone who wants an illegal gun can get one all too easily. Or that just would not be practical and cost-effective.

I still think you're asking for the impossible.

Far be it from me to defend Eyeball, but as they say, even a broken clock...

He has been specific...he has suggested psychological testing of applicants, he has suggested that weapons be stored in armouries or police lock ups...I'm sure there are other good ideas out there as well.

Now would that work in 100% of the time? No....but neither do seat belts.

[capricorn]

How will stiffer sentencing deter a killer that intends to kill himself?

Actually, I hope that stiffer sentencing would encourage a killer to off himself.

[waldo]

added for completeness: the vote on that motion related to the second report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, was a 6-5 vote in favour of the motion; specifically: YEAS: Joe Comartin, Luc Desnoyers, Mark Holland, Andrew Kania, Maria Mourani, Borys Wrzesnewskyj — 6; NAYS: Shelly Glover, Candice Hoeppner, Dave MacKenzie, Rick Norlock, Brent Rathgeber — 5.

strange that both capricorn and scribblet... got something... got this wrong - that the CBC most certainly is correct in this regard; that the linked and quoted CBC article most certainly is correct in stating that, "Members of Parliament vote on a Liberal motion to defeat a Conservative backbencher's private member's bill to repeal the 15-year-old gun registry".

- on June 9, Liberal MP Marc Holland (Ajax—Pickering, ON), moved the second report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security => the report that concluded, that presented: "In accordance with its Order of Reference of Wednesday, March 3, 2010, your Committee has considered Bill C-391, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (repeal of long-gun registry), and agreed on Thursday, June 3, 2010, to report the following:

That this Committee, pursuant to Standing Order 97.1 (1), recommends that the House of Commons do not proceed further with Bill C-391, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (repeal of long-gun registry), because the Committee has heard sufficient testimony that the bill will dismantle a tool that promotes and enhances public security and the safety of Canadian police officers.

- on Jun 15, the Speaker of the House, Peter Miliken, informed the House, "that under the provisions of Standing Order 97.1(2) I am designating Tuesday, September 21, 2010, as the day fixed for the consideration of the motion to concur in the second report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.

The report contains a recommendation not to proceed further with Bill C-391, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (repeal of long-gun registry)."

- on Sept 21, Conservative Deputy Speaker, Andrew Scheer, ordered that, "Pursuant to Standing Order 97.1(2) the motion to concur in the second report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security (recommendation not to proceed further with Bill C-391, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (repeal of long-gun registry) presented on Wednesday, June 9, 2010 is deemed to be proposed"

[Wild Bill]

Not until you answer a question I've asked you for weeks now.

How will stiffer sentencing deter a killer that intends to kill himself?

I expect a simple answer to a simple question so I can carry on with the debate.

I never quarreled about that! The answer is obvious - it won't! We've always agreed on that one!

My point is more simple. If you can't protect yourself from a "wingnut" (or are not allowed! Sometimes it seems that if you carried a gun to protect yourself and had to use it the courts would punish YOU far worse than the person who threatened or even TOOK your life, family and/or property with a gun!) then why bother instituting programs that do nothing and eat up money?

I'm the "Utilitarian", remember? If it doesn't work, don't bother! Robbing us of taxes that could be better spent elsewhere just to fake a "do nothing in reality" approach to reassure the simple is just a hypocritical waste, IMHO.

The gun registry was just another "Liberal Solution", where "It doesn't have to work! It's enough to say we've got one!"

I would have been much happier if the money had been spent to tie all the provinces' police computer systems together, so that if a felon on the run is picked up in BC for jaywalking it will flag the computers in PEI, where he is wanted for murder.

For guess what? Right now, the computers don't talk to each other at all! There is no shared database. That murderer on the run would just pay his jaywalking fine and continue on his merry way! It happens every day!

Frankly, the inanity of it all often just makes me sick! If someone doesn't support doing something FOR REAL then I wish he would just get the hell out of the way!

Edited September 22, 2010 by Wild Bill

[Saipan]

He has been specific...he has suggested psychological testing of applicants, he has suggested that weapons be stored in armouries or police lock ups...I'm sure there are other good ideas out there as well.

1) Psychological testing of applicants.

a) Do criminals apply for any licence?

Are politicians - who are responsible for lot more - tested by any psychologer? Namely the Hoplophobes.

2) "Weapons" stored in armouries: Whose "weapons"? That of criminals? Or duck hunters? Always? If one goes hunting should he drive 400 km to armoury and back after an afternoon hunt. Or that of Olympic competitors. And WHY? WHAT it will do or prevent exactly?

3) What are the other "good" ideas?

4) What did the 76 year old handgun registration accomplish so far?

Edited September 29, 2010 by Saipan

[RNG]

Could someone please tell me how the gun registry would have prevented the Lepine killings from happening?

[eyeball]

1) Psychological testing of applicants...

2) "Weapons" stored in armouries: Whose "weapons"? That of criminals? Or duck hunters? Always? If one goes hunting should he drive 400 km to armoury and back after an afternoon hunt. Or that of Olympic competitors. And WHY? WHAT it will do or prevent exactly?

1 in 5 Canadians will suffer a mental disease at some time in their lives and in addition to this 1 million Canadians could suffer dementia within the next 10 - 20 years. Given the millions of guns out there, homicidal/suicidal gun deaths at the hands of mentally disturbed people will most certainly climb, likely through the roof. Given the dismal amount of public resources that are allocated towards helping people cope with mental illness and dementia, I suspect many and perhaps even more homicide/suicide killings will be committed by healthy albeit desperate people who finally come to their wit's end while trying to cope with a demented family member.

The storage of guns at armouries, target ranges, hunting clubs etc could prevent who knows how many violent tragic deaths...several hundred and maybe even thousands.

I think gun control might warrant special mention in our Charter. I'm certainly not the first to say guns and constitutions in the same breath.

[eyeball]

Could someone please tell me how the gun registry would have prevented the Lepine killings from happening?

It wouldn't have, we would have had a much better chance of preventing him with real gun control.

[RNG]

It wouldn't have, we would have had a much better chance of preventing him with real gun control.

How do you become a Skookum member?

[Saipan]

1 in 5 Canadians will suffer a mental disease at some time in their lives

Should we allow Canadians run for office or join military and police?

And how will the registration prevent that?

and in addition to this 1 million Canadians could suffer dementia within the next 10 - 20 years. Given the millions of guns out there, homicidal/suicidal gun deaths at the hands of mentally disturbed people will most certainly climb, likely through the roof.

Through the roof! The end is near! We all gonna die!

So why it's going down in the USA?

Why is suicide much higher in Japan (country with no legal ownership of guns) than Canada, and in Canada higher than in the USA??

The storage of guns at armouries, target ranges, hunting clubs etc could prevent who knows how many violent tragic deaths...several hundred and maybe even thousands.

How EXACTLY?

I think gun control might warrant special mention in our Charter. I'm certainly not the first to say guns and constitutions in the same breath.

IT WAS ONE OF THE MAIN GOALS ON NAZI GERMANY AND COMMUNIST COUNTRIES.

Disarm the population.

[M.Dancer]

2) "Weapons" stored in armouries: Whose "weapons"? That of criminals? Or duck hunters? Always? If one goes hunting should he drive 400 km to armoury and back after an afternoon hunt. Or that of Olympic competitors. And WHY? WHAT it will do or prevent exactly?

3) What are the other "good" ideas?

I think making sure the armoury is 400km away is your best idea yet...

[eyeball]

How do you become a Skookum member?

By choice.

[Saipan]

I think making sure the armoury is 400km away is your best idea yet...

We don't care if it's 1,000. All households keep firearms at home. Just like in Switzerland and other low crime countries. In case of Swiss they keep even government issued military guns at home.

But that doesn't answer all the other questions. For example why are some liberals Hoplophobes?

[M.Dancer]

We don't care if it's 1,000.

Good...lets make it 1000 then.

[M.Dancer]

All households keep firearms at home.

Incorrect.

Persons who have target pistols have target pistol licenses and must leave their pistols in their club's lock up. You should at least know the facts before you spout off stupid...

[M.Dancer]

For example why are some liberals Hoplophobes?

Because naked greeks wielding spears are frightening. Why do some gun enthusiasts beat their wives?

[Saipan]

Incorrect.

Persons who have target pistols have target pistol licenses and must leave their pistols in their club's lock up. You should at least know the facts before you spout off stupid...

Speaking of "spout off stupid". Clearly you don't own any firearms (legally) unless you speak of UK.

Never mind "pistols" We have also revolvers on the same PAL licence AT HOME

Can you name the "club" that stores firearms and who guards them? Crime gangs want to know where is that one stop shopping.

In our case it would be a shooting range in the bush under the watchful eye of a black bear.

Note to hoplophobes: FIREARMS include more than just "pistols".

Edited September 29, 2010 by Saipan

[M.Dancer]

Can you name the "club" that stores firearms and who guards them? Crime gangs want to know where is that one stop shopping.

So you think that a home is a safer place than a lock up?

I can name one, it is located in the Black Watch Armoury in Montreal. Ot is gaurded by the CF and the Corps of Commisioners. Good luck getting the safe open.