jdobbin

It is why I doubt it will be an election issue. Only with a majority can I see it happening. Do it early and have four years to wait to face the electorate and I can see the Tories making the argument that handgun registration is ineffective and then put new laws on gun crime in place instead. I have said from the beginning that I opposed the gun registry. By the way, that includes the handgun registry. I have always believed the focus should be on the gun licences. My thoughts were that the gunowner should have the record on the guns they own and that the police could ask for that record in the course of their duties.

You seem to think they are completely unrelated. I think I have shown that if the Tory argument is that registries are useless, it is right to question what they think of the handgun registry and its usefulness.

I asked people in the forum to consider it before simply drawing conclusions. Your letters to the government about electing senators cannot be forced on any government. It is a constitutional discussion. I wish Tories would stop trying to bypass that approach.

That is not question I asked and it childish for you to suggest I did. I said that if the Tory argument is that the registry is useless, it surely means that the handgun registry is useless as well. And if it isn't, why? Explain it it me. All I hear is that registry is useless. The way the Tories are framing this is that the police can't possibly feel assured or see it is as useful having a registry. It is why I said that with a majority, the Tories can ditch the registry for handguns using the same argument about it being ineffective. Somehow you think this is childish to think that is even possible.

Afraid not. There has always been talk about the gun laws and registries. Are you trying to avoid the issue of the effectiveness of the registries for partisan reasons? Your party says the registry is ineffective. I never heard them claim it is only part of the registry that is ineffective. Do you believe that handgun registry is an effective tool for police. And if so, why?

The criticism is that the registry itself is useless. If the argument is that the police can't rely on one part of it, why do think any part of it is reliable? It is a question that should be answered. Do you think the police rely on the registry for handguns? If yes, why? And why is it useless for long guns?

That Van Loan held for days before releasing. So much for open government. And when it was released, he questioned the honesty of the supporters. Kind of like pulling teeth to get the minister to release the information. I have asked for a complete review of the gun registry. If the Tories believe the long gun part of the registry is useless, they surely think the same about the handgun registry. And if not, why not?

The registry is the registry and the Tories have been critical of it in general. There is no getting around that fact. It is the Tories who have said that the registry is a joke and no cop should think it useful. You seem to think that only means long guns. What do you think they mean by that?

I certainly didn't know in great detail the local people involved although we have talked before about the corruption in things like construction before. That conversation was in regard to our talk on price fixing and gas and I remarked about how corruption in construction prices had historically plagued Quebec. I don't think I ever imagined it was rife even now. I looked at the election percentages and the record of ousting a sitting mayor. It is a pretty dismal record in Quebec and for the whole country. Mayors die in office if that is their wish. I have seen some of the bitterness afterwards. It seems to be the fallback measure. Quebec probably requires a bilingual mayor given its population. That alone would be an issue for people who wanted that connection to their mayor.

Now you are just acting petulant and changing the subject.

Think I have given a number of citations including those from Van Loan that he thinks the registry is ineffective. The argument they have made were about all guns, not just long guns. Boy, you really love the personalizing, don't you. 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. I don't attend party only meetings for the Tories.

It is a little hard to take Robert George at face value on this given his conservative credentials. I can imagine that Obama's remarks either before or after the native meeting would have met with his scorn. The conference was an important thing. The business of the nation goes on. For example, today's news conference covered employment figures and the shooting. You think Obama should cancel remarks on employment numbers?

But if the Tories end it, I'm sure you think it will be brilliant. By the way, still see you can't ignore me.

Next target for you... the handgun registry? Another waste of money?

Just countering the argument that the Liberals are to blame for the vaccine shortage as the Calgary Herald states. Or do you believe that is true?

Which was sourced from newspapers reports. http://www.thespec.com/News/CanadaWorld/article/665628 Now, is it your argument that Canada could only get single sourced vaccine? Come on. Fess up.

Rod Bruinooge for years has argued in his constituency meetings that gun registration was ineffective. And he didn't mean just for long guns.

It is something you can't seem to do. I can help. There is an ignore button. Feel free to press it. But a parting shot, I can easily seeing you supporting the end of the handgun registry and telling me later how brilliant the Tories were for doing so. I can see you lining up all the arguments to justify it and denying ever saying it was impossible that it was going to be dropped.

If you are like a lot of Canadians, you will end up stealing your signal. I can walk up and down my street and Dish Network and DirectTV dishes. Everyone I know seems to steal the signal. There is no enforcement in the least. I've even the dishes on cop's houses. I must be the only lunatic still paying for my signal. As for your list... Yeek! 3 C-Spans?

Stop with your own idiotic lies that a single source was the only Tory choice. Canada's own top doctor says it isn't true and the Feds just bought doses of H1N1 vaccine from Australia last week which proves it wasn't the only choice available under the contract. No wonder Harper keeps falling short of a majority. It took a freedom of information request to get details of the contract revealed and expose the lie that the Liberals were to blame for all of this.

Another lie that you are exposed for: http://www.thespec.com/News/CanadaWorld/article/665628

The Liberals are being blamed for the vaccine shortage. Think that is sill given the information that a single source was not the only choice the Liberal contract in 2001 gave today's government? The problem was interrupting the production line for two types of H1N1 vaccines. This is where the contract allowed for some freedom to get another supplier. http://www.thespec.com/News/CanadaWorld/article/665628

I believe I did show that. http://www.liberal.ca/en/newsroom/media-releases/16836_just-the-facts-conservative-pandemic-incompetence I watched him on CTV's National say that the contract wasn't limited to one supplier and I have shown in a few links here that the contract was never for 100% of the vaccine. The Canadian Press Story I linked shows as much. The accusation is the Liberals contracted out for 100% to a single source. Think you have seen the CP story says no. I linked the CP story on the contract itself that says the contract was for 75% of the vaccine and the Liberals responded after Butler Jones indicated that a single source was not only choice Health Canada had. Aside from the CTV news interview, I found he also said that Canada was not prohibited from buying vaccine elsewhere in a news conference I saw on Newsworld. http://www.thespec.com/News/CanadaWorld/article/665628 Blaming the Liberals for a single source contract for H1N1 is passing the buck based on the contract that was signed. It never limited the Tories from getting other suppliers.

And long argued about effectiveness. For things I observed at Conservative MPs meetings with constituents?

If the argument has been the effectiveness of the registration, he can argue that the handguns are equally useless and a danger to police. Toss in more measures against gun use in a crime and I think a majority cushions him from long term problems. Tom Flanagan has called it incremental conservatism. if the goal is to get rid of gun registration, pick it apart a bit at a time. Or do you think this is completely beyond the realm of possibility?