Liberals and Gun Control

[Wild Bill]

People with guns need to wake up and realize that the City population is significantly larger then the rural population and quite frankly, few people in Canada have firearms.

If you want to end up with the Cities making the decisions for you, keep bashing the registry and defend assinine actions of the minority offenders and you will be successful.

Seems to me that having the Cities make the decisions is the status quo, MM! Why do you think the Liberals phrased the gun registry the way they did?

The Liberals and the NDP seem to be almost exclusively city-based, except for portions of Northern Ontario. I doubt if they ever even think about rural folks, much less care.

If some rural family wanted a gun to handle the bears that occasionally tried to break into their house and eat their kids I'm betting Jack would side with PETA and tell them that they should be using negotiation instead of asking for a gun.

[madmax]

Seems to me that having the Cities make the decisions is the status quo, MM! Why do you think the Liberals phrased the gun registry the way they did?

Exactly the reason expressed. It made them look like they were doing something.

The Liberals and the NDP seem to be almost exclusively city-based, except for portions of Northern Ontario. I doubt if they ever even think about rural folks, much less care.

The NDP swept Northern Ontario, and its about as rural and firearm friendly as a region gets. The Conservatives have on Seat, and that is ironically shared by a NDP Provincial MPP.

Look at this Map, and the Colour Orange is very dominant in Rural Hunting Regions.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/map/2008/#

When I go hunting, its Northern Ontario. When I am farting around, its in Southern Ontario with the dogs and ducks.

If some rural family wanted a gun to handle the bears that occasionally tried to break into their house and eat their kids I'm betting Jack would side with PETA and tell them that they should be using negotiation instead of asking for a gun.

For the record. Urban Jack, has managed to land more seats in Ontario then Ed Broadbent, and the vast amount of that is rural. Nothing in TO for the NDP, the even lost seats there when the LPC were weak.

So, regardless of Stereo Type, voters in these rural communities are not that concerned about Jacks positions on Bears.

I am hearing (now) that Sarah Palin really didn't shoot firearms from a helicopter...

Edited September 22, 2009 by madmax

[noahbody]

I think I have heard only one head of the police force speak against the Registry and that was Julian Fantino.

This took 3 seconds to google.

http://www.cdnshootingsports.org/2009/04/w...n_registry.html

[madmax]

This took 3 seconds to google.

http://www.cdnshootingsports.org/2009/04/w...n_registry.html

Yes, its too bad its a mishmash of quotes from various sources, some in context and some out of context.

DENIS COTE, PRESIDENT OF THE QUEBEC MUNICIPAL POLICE FEDERATION

A female police officer, gunned down with a weapon powerful enough to kill an elephant while answering a noise complaint, had previously helped arrest her alleged killer for harassing another policewoman. FranAois Pepin was charged yesterday with first-degree murder in the death of Const. Valerie Gignac and possessing a firearm. Pepin was also charged with breaking a 1999 probation condition by having a gun outside hunting season. Laval police, reeling from Wednesday's death of their colleague, were blunt in their assessment that the justice system let them down. "How come if you have a ban, you're not allowed to possess a firearm for 10 years, how come you can allow it for the hunting season?" asked Denis Cote, president of the Quebec municipal police federation. "If you're a threat for everybody, make sure you're a threat for all 12 months in a year."

Edited September 22, 2009 by madmax

[Argus]

You mean they would rather have more money and keep the registry. I haven't heard a force yet that said they wanted it dropped and the money used elsewhere.

The cops say it. The chiefs don't. But the chiefs are subject to very liberal police services boards populated by very liberal municipal politicians.

[Argus]

Yes, its too bad its a mishmash of quotes from various sources, some in context and some out of context.

Your quote had nothing to do with the gun registry. A ban on possessing or not possessing firearms has nothing to do with the registry.

[Goat Boy©]

Handguns were never to be banned. It was all a feel good campaign. They simply weren't to be allowed in the hands of most people, but there was still ways around it. And yes, to most gun owners, handguns are effectively banned. You can't buy them with a simple PAL.

If hand guns were never to be banned, then why waste a few more billion on frivolous legislation, as well as further taxing owners forcing them to to go out and pay for an ATT to avoid having firearms be confiscated.

And yes, you can buy a restricted firearm with a PAL, you simply pay the additional $20 to have 'Restricted' printed on it, which is essentially standard procedure.

Edited September 22, 2009 by Goat Boy©

[Goat Boy©]

The war on drugs can be stopped, the money wasted on the Registry cannot come back. Its still a pitence compared to what the LPC and CPC took from the EI fund.

The comment was in reference to the Liberal parties published goal of a complete ban on handguns, not the registry.

The Registry isn't a ban. And quite frankly we already have a ban on many firearms. I enjoy firing a howitzer, but I don't believe everyone needs one in their backyard.

When you suggest regulation. We have regulations, and the registery is part of that regulation.

I was not a fan of the Gun Registery when it first came out. It was less a fan of the waste in implementing the system.

Gun owners are in the minority in Canada. The registery is here to stay even if the CPC cut the funds to the registery, they would have to introduce a similar program, because the Police force want a registery.

As for banning of weapons. If you don't have a bann on certain weapons then it is LEGAL to have them. Many weapons throughout history have been banned. Some with success and others not so much.

Quite Frankly I am of the opinion that local communities are more in touch with firearms policies then the federal government.

If a local community wants to ban firearms, then they should have the right to do so and see how successful that program is.

This allows small rural communities the right to maintain firearms for pest control, hunting and fun, whereas communities like Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, etc can ban firearms if they believe this can lead to a better community.

People with guns need to wake up and realize that the City population is significantly larger then the rural population and quite frankly, few people in Canada have firearms.

If you want to end up with the Cities making the decisions for you, keep bashing the registry and defend assinine actions of the minority offenders and you will be successful.

Regulation is the banning of certain firearms which are construed as dangerous in my view. I agree, and their is no reason for anybody to own a fully automatic weapons, derringers, sawed-off shotguns, etc. They did get a little bit silly with the restricted list, like the fact that an AR-15 is considered restricted, but a Mini-14 is not.....by ballistics, they are nearly identical. It is possible to convert a Mini-14 to an uncontrolled fully automatic mode with simple machined parts, an AR-15 needs custom illegal party that have to be smuggled across the border.

I agree, the registry isn't going anywhere which stands as a tribute to stupidity. Like throwing money into a fire. But all in all, gun control laws in Canada are fine, which is why I find it so silly that they seek to reform them and further punish innocent firearms owners, without even taking a shot at enforcing the current set of laws. It is the justice system that needs reform, if the current laws were actually being used, we might have some sort of a foundation to base reform on. Were it not for the Liberal Senate, this may actually be the case today.

I also agree that gun control should be directed on a more local basis, but provincially. Ontario can have their ban, and the issue is closed.

[madmax]

Your quote had nothing to do with the gun registry. A ban on possessing or not possessing firearms has nothing to do with the registry.

that was the point....It wasn't my quote or link.

[madmax]

The comment was in reference to the Liberal parties published goal of a complete ban on handguns, not the registry.

My error.

[Topaz]

The noon news today said most of the guns in Toronto, that have killed, comes from homes that were broken into and stolen. So are these registered handguns? Do all people in Toronto own a gun?

[jdobbin]

The cops say it. The chiefs don't. But the chiefs are subject to very liberal police services boards populated by very liberal municipal politicians.

Since we don't have a poll of police, it has to be pretty anecdotal information.

[eyeball]

The cops say it. The chiefs don't. But the chiefs are subject to very liberal police services boards populated by very liberal municipal politicians.

There's never a death squad around when you need it eh?

[Wild Bill]

The noon news today said most of the guns in Toronto, that have killed, comes from homes that were broken into and stolen. So are these registered handguns? Do all people in Toronto own a gun?

Either you didn't listen closely enough or the report was wrong. Try googling:

http://www.guncontrol.ca/English/Home/Work...gtheIllegal.pdf

"Toronto Police Service conducted a review of crime handguns submitted to the Gun and

Gang Task Force during 2004 and found over half (52% were smuggled) and almost half

(48%) originated in Canada."

"Canada Customs seizes about 1000 - 1500 smuggled guns each year. This number

represents the tip of the iceberg as only a small percentage (3%) of trans-border traffic is

checked.

• These guns account for as many as 50% of the handguns recovered in crime.

• In 2004, the Canada Border Services Agency seized 1,099 firearms at the border including

140 non-restricted firearms, 299 restricted firearms and 660 prohibited firearms.16

• While guns originally owned in Canada are a major source for the illegal trade, in large cities

in Canada, smuggled guns account for more than 50% of the handguns recovered in crime."

You might also consider that several high profile cases of stolen guns in Toronto came about from criminals reading the address book of gun owners when they purchased ammunition. It was a simple matter to then go to those addresses and break in. One case involved a law enforcement officer who was a legal collector. He was on holidays and they literally ripped a large locked safe full of firearms out of his house.

The ammunition list was a result of government regs that perhaps were not very well thought out by people not of a practical bent. You know, Liberals!

I still don't understand why anybody cares if criminals are using guns. They only get a slap on the wrist if they're ever caught and brought to court so what does it matter anyway?

I remember reading the Liberal Bill that brought about their gun registry and being struck by the fact that it DIDN'T ADD EVEN ONE DAY to the mandatory sentence for any criminal actually using a gun in the commission of a crime. In fact, often the penalties purposed for not registering a firearm were harsher than those typically given to some felon who had held up a variety store with a gun.

To me, this could only mean that the Liberals were not serious about reducing gun crime. If it was more than just a show why would they not increase the mandatory penalties as a deterrent? Why pick on farmers, hunters and gun club shooters?

The answer seems obvious. It was a cheap and easy shot that would buy them a lot of votes from people that don't think very deeply about what actually would happen!

[Wilber]

Since we don't have a poll of police, it has to be pretty anecdotal information.

I remember the head of the Police Chiefs Assn. (Ottawa PD at that time) saying that if the registry saved just one life it would be worth the money. That is the oldest canard in the world used to try and justify over spending. It's like saying if we put 500 billion more into health care and the net result was only 500 lives saved because of that spending, we received good value for the money spent.

All the registry can do is tell an officer if the registered owner or tenant of a home or registered owner of a vehicle, also owns a registered firearm. Not useless information to be sure and definitely handy in the case of something like a domestic dispute but hardly the vitally important program its proponents claim.

[nicky10013]

I remember the head of the Police Chiefs Assn. (Ottawa PD at that time) saying that if the registry saved just one life it would be worth the money. That is the oldest canard in the world used to try and justify over spending. It's like saying if we put 500 billion more into health care and the net result was only 500 lives saved because of that spending, we received good value for the money spent.

All the registry can do is tell an officer if the registered owner or tenant of a home or registered owner of a vehicle, also owns a registered firearm. Not useless information to be sure and definitely handy in the case of something like a domestic dispute but hardly the vitally important program its proponents claim.

Hands up, how many of you who hate the gun registry live in a city like Toronto or Vancouver?

[jdobbin]

All the registry can do is tell an officer if the registered owner or tenant of a home or registered owner of a vehicle, also owns a registered firearm. Not useless information to be sure and definitely handy in the case of something like a domestic dispute but hardly the vitally important program its proponents claim.

If the Tories really believe the registry is useless, they should ask the police in a poll or at the very least put it to a study. Hard to say their push to end it is anything but ideological until that measure is taken.

[Smallc]

And yes, you can buy a restricted firearm with a PAL, you simply pay the additional $20 to have 'Restricted' printed on it, which is essentially standard procedure.

It's a different test and it's one that most people don't take. No one is my house has restricted printed on their PALs. Sorry, but you're wrong, it's not standard procedure.

[wulf42]

This is how ridiculous the gun registry is...........

if you legally own a rifle registered licensed blah blah.....and say you have a POL

which is a "Possession only License" which means you can own the rifle you have

but can t acquire anymore!

Then say you want to buy another rifle exactly the same type and caliber

well now you will have to go and take a non-restricted

firearms course $50.00 and then after you do that and pass the test you will have to

apply for a PAL "possession and acquisition license" another $50.00 to get another

gun like the one you already own ........if that isn t a scam i don t know what is!

Edited September 22, 2009 by wulf42

[Goat Boy©]

It's a different test and it's one that most people don't take. No one is my house has restricted printed on their PALs. Sorry, but you're wrong, it's not standard procedure.

OK, lets start here.

Have you ever taken the firearms test?

Tell the truth.

[Oleg Bach]

OK, lets start here.

Have you ever taken the firearms test?

Tell the truth.

Old school types such as myself grew up without any gun controls..we NEVER went near short arms that were designed for killing human beings..as kids we had access to all sorts of fire arms other than those reserved for law enforcement - We respect that - we treated guns as toys...and never had toy guns..we never would even think of pointing a gun towards a human being...My children as young as five were taught to shoot...they have no interest in guns..BUT they know how to use them. As for liberals or conservatives and gun control - they really just want ulitmate PEOPLE control.... Police have the ability to enforce laws - because they have the abiltiy to kill....So it all gets down to law ENFORCEMENT...You need to have one standing army - Police! They are the only ones who should have guns...BECAUSE - The culture though media has warped what young people understand to be power or respect. That average Canadian youth can not even shoot straight let alone know what a gun is for or what real resepect is.

[Goat Boy©]

This is how ridiculous the gun registry is...........

if you legally own a rifle registered licensed blah blah.....and say you have a POL

which is a "Possession only License" which means you can own the rifle you have

but can t acquire anymore!

Then say you want to buy another rifle exactly the same type and caliber

well now you will have to go and take a non-restricted

firearms course $50.00 and then after you do that and pass the test you will have to

apply for a PAL "possession and acquisition license" another $50.00 to get another

gun like the one you already own ........if that isn t a scam i don t know what is!

Nothing to do with the long gun registry.

The POL is ridiculous, but liscensing firearms owners is a good idea.

[wulf42]

Nothing to do with the long gun registry.

The POL is ridiculous, but liscensing firearms owners is a good idea.

As do i....however the cost and training needed for getting

another long gun when you already own one seems pointless.

[Smallc]

OK, lets start here.

Have you ever taken the firearms test?

Tell the truth.

No. Both my brother and my father (and most of the people in my community and most people I know) have PALs. They can't buy restricted or prohibited weapons. A few people I know can, but not many.

[Oleg Bach]

The cops in Toronto just went on a spree removing guns stored in closets that have been in some families for a few generations...They said that these formerly registered fire arms are now not going to be "stolen" YET - gun runners coming up from the states are not treated harshly by our courts when caught..wtf?