Jump to content

jdobbin

Member
  • Posts

    21,438
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by jdobbin

  1. He can argue all he wants but I do not think this would have popular support from a large majority of the public, including a huge number who opposed the botched long gun registry.

    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 really have mixed feelings about getting rid of the registry. I think something important may have been missed here because a mixture of incompetence, arrogance and dogma has stomped all over common sense and compromise. Instead of making law abiding gun owners part of the process, the instigators of the registry treated them like enemies and didn't care how much money they spent doing it. We are now seeing the backlash. This has become something like the abortion debate, we are past the possibility of a middle ground.

    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.

  2. And who are you to ask for that, where was the liberal government when I sent letters demanding they appoint the elected senators from Alberta, instead of a failed provincial leader?

    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.

  3. Your comment was childish yesterday - and it's childish today. Long guns have a useful purpose for farmers, hunters and isolated rural populations. These people don't use handguns and don't need them. On this issue, Conservatives listen to their constituents....and the constituents have no problem with the handgun registry - never did, never will.

    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.

  4. The critism was of the long gun registry, the bans, restrictions and registry on hand guns was around a lot longer and yet there was hardly a peep, yet and soon as the liberals introduced the expansive expensive long gun registry that punished farmers and hunters, then and only then did "the" gun registry ( the long gun registry) become an issue. You know this but choose to ignore it.

    Afraid not. There has always been talk about the gun laws and registries.

    So why are trying to change the subject from the long gun registry to the hand gun registry (which no one but you is talking about)? Is it for partisan purposes?

    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?

  5. I will spell it out for you when people talk about the "gun registry" they are refering to the long gun registry. They shorten it to "the" gun registry. I hear it all the time, the fight never has been about hand guns, and you are smart enough to know it.

    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?

  6. Sorry for another thread on the subject but this adds some important information to the discussion. Finally we're getting some information that gets to the crux of exactly how much value the Long Gun Registry provides.

    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.

    My question has always been - how often do police access the system to actually find out about Long Guns? Well....here's a quote from Peter Van Loan. You may choose to argue with his numbers to some degree but it certainly portrays an order of magnitude that puts things in perspective......and it's not surprising that getting this information is like pulling teeth - the hundreds of people who are responsible for maiantaining the Long Gun Registry are in fear of losing their jobs:

    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?

  7. No more petulant then you have been nor did I change the subject from the Long gun registry to handgun registry.

    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?

  8. I wuz wrong, once again.

    Then again, Tremblay went from 60% to 35% - but he's still mayor, and he still has a majority on council.

    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.

    Some Francophones in Montreal are accusing Anglophones in Montreal of racism because the anglophones didn't vote for Harel. According to the francophones, the anglophones chose corruption over separation and a unilinigual mayor.

    Ugh.

    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.

  9. Well if many have been lobbying I'm sure you can find a citation or two.

    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.

    Also, is travelling around to attend Conservative MPs meetings with constituents a hobby of yours or did you just admit you're a liberal party spy?

    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.

  10. Obama is not immune to foot in mouth.

    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?

  11. So your proof is a link from the Liberal Party website? LOL! :lol:

    Too funny.

    Which was sourced from newspapers reports.

    http://www.thespec.com/News/CanadaWorld/article/665628

    Butler-Jones said the terms of the contract with GlaxoSmithKline, which Public Works said could only be obtained through a request under the Access to Information and Privacy Act, does not prohibit Canada from purchasing vaccine from another supplier – as it did when it bought 200,000 doses of adjuvant-free vaccine from Australia for pregnant women last week – but he said there are no plans to do that for the regular version because there is no global excess of vaccine and he expects shipments to ramp up next week.

    Now, is it your argument that Canada could only get single sourced vaccine?

    Come on. Fess up.

  12. Dobbin is trying to spin his own Hyperbole as fact just ignore him.

    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.

  13. They've been screwing us over since Ted Rogers laid his first cable. Have a look at what you get in the US for about what I'm paying now. The lineup they make available is a hell of a lot better than what i see from any Canadian cable or satellite operator.

    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?

  14. And they wonder why they are so far down in the polls? Stop with the idiotic lies, and maybe people will take you seriously.

    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.

  15. Yet another one of Dobbin's half-truths. It's getting to be an epidemic worse than H1N1. When confronted with the facts, he spins like a top.

    Another lie that you are exposed for:

    http://www.thespec.com/News/CanadaWorld/article/665628

    Butler-Jones said the terms of the contract with GlaxoSmithKline, which Public Works said could only be obtained through a request under the Access to Information and Privacy Act, does not prohibit Canada from purchasing vaccine from another supplier – as it did when it bought 200,000 doses of adjuvant-free vaccine from Australia for pregnant women last week – but he said there are no plans to do that for the regular version because there is no global excess of vaccine and he expects shipments to ramp up next week.
  16. I think it's a bit silly to politicize this, but the Liberals do seemn intent on doing so.

    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?

    Without actually reading the contract, or hearing from a lawyer who has, it's impossible to say one way or the other how free the government was to go to multiple suppliers. They may have had that ability in an emergency, in the event of shortages, but no no expected there to be a shortage. Canada, unlike other places, like the US, was said to have more than enough to go around - 50 million shots to be available. GSK said that wouldn't be a problem for them. In that event, I don't see how anyone could say in advance that there were shortages which justified turning to other suppliers against the terms of the long term contract.

    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

    Butler-Jones said the terms of the contract with GlaxoSmithKline, which Public Works said could only be obtained through a request under the Access to Information and Privacy Act, does not prohibit Canada from purchasing vaccine from another supplier – as it did when it bought 200,000 doses of adjuvant-free vaccine from Australia for pregnant women last week – but he said there are no plans to do that for the regular version because there is no global excess of vaccine and he expects shipments to ramp up next week.
  17. Dobbins, if you'd provided a link to a story from Dr Butler-Jones instead of posting ridiculous non-sequiturs like

    I believe I did show that.

    http://www.liberal.ca/en/newsroom/media-releases/16836_just-the-facts-conservative-pandemic-incompetence

    Chief Public Health Officer Dr. David Butler-Jones confirmed yesterday that the government can order more vaccine from other suppliers. It failed to do so.

    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.

    Incidentally, is there a link? The material you've posted appears to literally be taken from the Liberal Party talking-points page. Is that why you were reluctant to provide a link to it?

    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

    Butler-Jones said the terms of the contract with GlaxoSmithKline, which Public Works said could only be obtained through a request under the Access to Information and Privacy Act, does not prohibit Canada from purchasing vaccine from another supplier – as it did when it bought 200,000 doses of adjuvant-free vaccine from Australia for pregnant women last week – but he said there are no plans to do that for the regular version because there is no global excess of vaccine and he expects shipments to ramp up next week.

    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.

  18. But Harper has also said he would maintain the handgun registry and bans on restricted guns. Why would that change under a majority situation? because of a minority in the party who want to get rid of it. I just don't buy that argument, if the Conservatives get a majority they are going to look to maintain it not lose support by pushing through controversial agendas.

    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?

×
×
  • Create New...