Charlton Heston wants long-gun registry scrapped...

[Wild Bill]

I realize you can't stop every single enraged person, as I've repeated ad nauseum.

You can definitely make it harder for them to use guns however by implementing gun control and reduce the availability of guns.

Eyeball, as has been said many times, you have stated noble wishes but the problem is you and nobody else has yet suggested any way of doing it that will work with actual criminals!

All we hear is some methods to make things very aggravating and inconvenient for law abiding gun owners. Criminals couldn't care less because they don't bother procuring their guns in a legal manner anyway.

As I posted to you before, you can try harsher sentences for illegal gun use (which has never been done, to my knowledge. At least, not mandatory sentences that judges can't ignore) or you can try stronger methods of personal defense, which themselves are not the most attractive.

Sadly, I think you are demanding the impossible and thus will forever be disappointed. Still, is that any reason to attack law abiding gun owners? All that does is allow politicians the appearance of doing something when they have not given us the reality.

[scribblet]

Where's Waldo.... oops there he is on the left side I think LOL

There is plenty of evidence to support the contention that there have been funds paid to groups where there shouldn't have been, the link I posted was the beginning of this year.

and BTW, your personal attacks and name calling are against the rules of this forum, not to mention that name calling is the ammunition of the uninformed ( and unintelligent) !!

[waldo]

There is plenty of evidence to support the contention that there have been funds paid to groups where there shouldn't have been, the link I posted was the beginning of this year.

if there is, as you say, "plenty of evidence"... then you should quote/cite it, rather than link to a right-wing blog with a strong hate-on for the gun registry... a blog (link) you offered that has no substantive detail - none - to support your fraud claim against Wendy Cukier... a blog (link) that includes complete fabrication and can't even be true to the very Toronto Sun article it presumes to offer as support for it's own bullshit. Very telling you have nothing to say over the complete debunking of that blog (link) reference you provided - hey? So you choose to slime using dated (2006) fabrications... cause you can. Or at least until someone calls you on it - hey?

and BTW, your personal attacks and name calling are against the rules of this forum, not to mention that name calling is the ammunition of the uninformed ( and unintelligent) !!

no personal attacks were made... what name did I call you? Bullshit is the ammunition of the weak-minded and lazy who choose to distort, fabricate and spew... you appear well stocked up. You could continue to presume to cite forum rules, or you could report a post you have concerns over... or you could grow a pair - your choice.

[waldo]

Pot Kettle Black

Melody, feel free... at any time... to point out concerns you have with any posts offered... or at least as you're able to find time between caring for your cats! Frankly, until your recent coming out as a cat lady, I thought, given your vaunted post count, you had a whole lot of free time on your hands. I appreciate cats can be a handful for an aging spinster like yourself... so, really... any time, any contribution you can make, is a real bonus - indeed!

[scribblet]

if there is, as you say, "plenty of evidence"... then you should quote/cite it, rather than link to a right-wing blog with a strong hate-on for the gun registry... a blog (link) you offered that has no substantive detail - none - to support your fraud claim against Wendy Cukier... a blog (link) that includes complete fabrication and can't even be true to the very Toronto Sun article it presumes to offer as support for it's own bullshit. Very telling you have nothing to say over the complete debunking of that blog (link) reference you provided - hey? So you choose to slime using dated (2006) fabrications... cause you can. Or at least until someone calls you on it - hey?

There is plenty of evidence to point towards grants given by the liberals to lobbiests, to lobby against the registry. No debunking made - the evidence is there, just follow the money.

[waldo]

There is plenty of evidence to point towards grants given by the liberals to lobbiests, to lobby against the registry. No debunking made - the evidence is there, just follow the money.

and if there is evidence, contextually, you could choose to point it out and comment on it... or you could continue to offer up what you just did - a scurrilous, without foundation, fabrication concerning your claim of fraud (subsequently edited to an alleged fraud) against the president of the Coalition for Gun Control. Your choice.

[eyeball]

Eyeball, as has been said many times, you have stated noble wishes but the problem is you and nobody else has yet suggested any way of doing it that will work with actual criminals!

First of all, actual criminals are by far mostly associated with the criminalization of individual morality and behaviour and the prohibition of vice and were never the original or main reason for the gun registry. Preventing, as opposed to 100% eliminating, the murderous rampages of the the Marc Lepines of the world and domestic homocide/suicide was.

The criminals you are talking about have always been a separate issue, an issue that gun advocates un-necessarily dragged into things.

I and many others including yourself have either suggested and or acknowledged that decriminalizing the vices that cause most criminal gun violence - the fear of which has long since spilled over to legal gun owners by association - would do much to prevent a completely different class of criminal use of guns. The fact this sort of criminality has become so closely associated with guns in general is entirely the fault of gun advocates. I have consistently tried to maintain what I think is the appropriate division between the gun violence associated with the actual criminals you are talking about vs the domestic criminals that the registry was supposed to address.

All we hear is some methods to make things very aggravating and inconvenient for law abiding gun owners. Criminals couldn't care less because they don't bother procuring their guns in a legal manner anyway.

No most criminals in Canada trade their pot for guns from south of the border, so they can protect and fight over market share and so-called turf involved in shipping pot south of the border. Responsibility for this having to do with law abiding gun owners is a mystery to me but as I said that's something laissez-faire gun advocates need to own up to.

As I posted to you before, you can try harsher sentences for illegal gun use (which has never been done, to my knowledge. At least, not mandatory sentences that judges can't ignore) or you can try stronger methods of personal defense, which themselves are not the most attractive.

What do you mean, cracking down and getting tough have failed, miserably failed, at stopping illegal gun use. Look at the US and Mexico, who are and have both been demonstrably tougher and harsher than Canada.

Sadly, I think you are demanding the impossible and thus will forever be disappointed. Still, is that any reason to attack law abiding gun owners? All that does is allow politicians the appearance of doing something when they have not given us the reality.

Impossible, you mean like prohibiting vice?

I'm trying to settle for preventing a few Marc Lepines and a bunch of domestic homicides and suicides from occurring. Gun control of the type that targets domestic storage of weapons would reduce the availability of guns by millions.

The notion that domestic criminals, as opposed to actual criminals of the vice/prohibition variety, will somehow still be able to snap up a weapon whenever the mood to go postal strikes them is unsupportable. They'd either have to use an illegal gun or steal a gun from an actual criminal who as we all know are completely unaffected by domestic gun control. The other option would be to go check out their own gun(s) at the public armoury. I agree the system will never be 100% foolproof but what if we could make it 50 to 60 or maybe even 80 to 90 percent foolproof? I suggest that if someone fly's off in a homicidal and suicidal rage people close to the individual could give warning and people at armouries could be trained to spot and screen disturbed people, but I think the best guard against them would be to require that gun check out times be scheduled a week in advance.

As for enraged people who use cars or knives instead, I just don't think their numbers do or could come close to the number that have and can use guns. If they do where are they?

Edited September 18, 2010 by eyeball

[capricorn]

and if there is evidence, contextually, you could choose to point it out and comment on it... or you could continue to offer up what you just did - a scurrilous, without foundation, fabrication concerning your claim of fraud (subsequently edited to an alleged fraud) against the president of the Coalition for Gun Control. Your choice.

waldo, waldo, so quick to deplore claims that the evil pro-gun NRA are butting their noses in Canadian politics. Then, when presented with information that maybe, just maybe, an international anti-gun organization may be doing the same thing and perhaps in an insidious manner, waldo goes on a rapid-fire attack (pun intended) to discredit the information presented. Keep on trucking, but mind that carbon footprint.

[waldo]

and if there is evidence, contextually, you could choose to point it out and comment on it... or you could continue to offer up what you just did - a scurrilous, without foundation, fabrication concerning your claim of fraud (subsequently edited to an alleged fraud) against the president of the Coalition for Gun Control. Your choice.

waldo, waldo, so quick to deplore claims that the evil pro-gun NRA are butting their noses in Canadian politics.

like I said, you really should avoid your liquor cabinet before posting... deplore claims? I most certainly didn't, and wouldn't, disapprove of anyone suggesting the NRA has a history of attempting to influence the gun registry debate in Canada. Are you disputing NRA involvement in attempting to influence the gun registry debate in Canada?

Then, when presented with information that maybe, just maybe, an international anti-gun organization may be doing the same thing and perhaps in an insidious manner, waldo goes on a rapid-fire attack (pun intended) to discredit the information presented.

notwithstanding your overall vagueness, if you're talking about the Coalition For Gun Control... that's a national organization. But please, step-forward and make your case for the vile accusation that was raised against the president of that organization, Wendy Cukier.

Keep on trucking, but mind that carbon footprint.

you truly are an intellectual dimwit

[scribblet]

waldo, waldo, so quick to deplore claims that the evil pro-gun NRA are butting their noses in Canadian politics. Then, when presented with information that maybe, just maybe, an international anti-gun organization may be doing the same thing and perhaps in an insidious manner, waldo goes on a rapid-fire attack (pun intended) to discredit the information presented. Keep on trucking, but mind that carbon footprint.

There does seem to be a double standard here as with the Avaaz petition, it's okay for them to butt into Canadian affairs.

This is MP Gary B. who makes mention of the connection, I also understand he has a database of grants, would be interesting to see it.

http://www.themarknews.com/articles/1054-dump-the-gun-registry

Pro-registry groups such as the Coalition for Gun Control and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP) are the engines behind keeping the registry alive. These are politically-motivated lobby groups that derive financial support from pro-registry sources, so their positions are tainted and suspect in my view. CGI Group, for example, is a major registry software contractor, and a major contributor to CACP coffers.

Pro-registry lobby groups have been very successful in using slick public relations efforts to misinform an unsuspecting media and the public at large. I do hope that the truth will prevail when the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security examines Bill C-391 in the near future.

[Argus]

but, ya ya... all those urbanite snobs just don't get why Floyd & Ernie have no problem registering their pick-me-ups, yet vehemently resist the idea of having to register their squirrel shooters.

The cops don't show up at your door demanding you give up your car if you forget to renew your license.

[Argus]

I think the Liberals and NDP are well aware the gun registry serves no real purpose and accomplishes nothing of value. But it's an issue with the ignorant and fearful out there, almost all of whom are in urban settings where the Liberals are strong. So both parties are eager to portray themselves in at least one way, as doing something to keep people safe - despite the fact both parties are of the "hug a thug" notion of injustice.

The real way to keep people safe is to put violent people into prison for very long periods of time, but that just doesn't sit well with people who assume everyone is good at heart and that even multiple murderers must merely be misunderstood and responding to an unhappy childhood.

So trumpeting the gun registry makes them look good to the weak-minded who vote for them (Hello Waldo) but are too intellectually lazy to actually read up on the issues which move them. And it helps them in their efforts at portraying the Tories as rural gun-loving hicks along the lines of Palin or the NRA honchos.

It's all just political posturing from both parties designed to appeal to their urban bases, and in the absence of ideas which might get people to vote for them as opposed to voting against the Tories.

[Dave_ON]

Here it is: large numbers of rural Canadians-- including many who vote NDP-- do not support the long gun registry. That's something that urbanite snobs apparently just can't comprehend.

-k

Speaking of wedge politics... I find the use of pejorative labels to be inherently divisive and this one small statement contradicts and otherwise sound argument. Generally the use of phrases such as "right wing nut", "socialist", "special interest groups", "Toronto/urban Elites" or "country bumpkins" are pejorative and truly have no place in civilized discourse. Regardless of where one is from, or of their political stripe, their arguments can't simply be dismissed because we choose to label them as whatever "undesirable" happens to be in vogue.

[eyeball]

I think the Liberals and NDP are well aware the gun registry serves no real purpose and accomplishes nothing of value. But it's an issue with the ignorant and fearful out there, almost all of whom are in urban settings where the Liberals are strong. So both parties are eager to portray themselves in at least one way, as doing something to keep people safe - despite the fact both parties are of the "hug a thug" notion of injustice.

The Conservatives are every single bit as guilty of manipulating the ignorant and fearful on this issue.

Here's a case in point,

The real way to keep people safe is to put violent people into prison for very long periods of time, but that just doesn't sit well with people who assume everyone is good at heart and that even multiple murderers must merely be misunderstood and responding to an unhappy childhood.

So trumpeting the gun registry makes them look good to the weak-minded who vote for them (Hello Waldo) but are too intellectually lazy to actually read up on the issues which move them. And it helps them in their efforts at portraying the Tories as rural gun-loving hicks along the lines of Palin or the NRA honchos.

You are either ignorant and fearful or conniving and manipulative which one is it? You know the registry is useless and that real gun control is the only way to prevent the Lepines of the world and yet...you can you skate right past that plain simple fact, lambaste the Liberals for manipulating the weak-minded then turn right around and trumpet pretty much verbatim the very bullshit the Conservatives are manipulating this issue with. It's phenomenal.

You know what doesn't sit well with me, trying to figure out exactly how on Earth you crack down and get tough on a mass killer that has killed himself?

It's all just political posturing from both parties designed to appeal to their urban bases, and in the absence of ideas which might get people to vote for them as opposed to voting against the Tories.

It's all bullshit, from the Conservatives too.

[Wild Bill]

You are either ignorant and fearful or conniving and manipulative which one is it? You know the registry is useless and that real gun control is the only way to prevent the Lepines of the world and yet...you can you skate right past that plain simple fact, lambaste the Liberals for manipulating the weak-minded then turn right around and trumpet pretty much verbatim the very bullshit the Conservatives are manipulating this issue with. It's phenomenal.

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.

[scribblet]

The registry would not have saved anyone from Gamil Gharbi (Lepine), it hasn't yet saved one life.

[eyeball]

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

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

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.

Well, at least I'm trying to stay focused on the original issue, preventing more Marc Lepine's. I still don't know how or why on Earth you would think Harpers's answer, the threat of a really stiff jail sentence, would have deterred Marc Lepine who killed himself. As for why it will deter future Marc Lepines I refer you to your own words;

I still think you're asking for the impossible.

[eyeball]

The registry would not have saved anyone from Gamil Gharbi (Lepine), it hasn't yet saved one life.

Stiffer sentencing would not have saved anyone either.

[PIK]

Stiffer sentencing would not have saved anyone either.

But more funding and underestanding about mental health might have and the 2 billion would have been a good start, and remember this is a campaign promise not a wedge issue.

[myata]

but, ya ya... all those urbanite snobs just don't get why Floyd & Ernie have no problem registering their pick-me-ups, yet vehemently resist the idea of having to register their squirrel shooters.

Right on, that logical conclusion beats me also. How about a bill to abolish registration of trucks as unbearable and wasteful assault on our sacred rights, all yer staunch defenders of Farmer Joe? By what avenue of logic have you arrived at conclusion that a vehicle is a more dangerous item than a shotgun?

[PIK]

Right on, that logical conclusion beats me also. How about a bill to abolish registration of trucks as unbearable and wasteful assault on our sacred rights, all yer staunch defenders of Farmer Joe? By what avenue of logic have you arrived at conclusion that a vehicle is a more dangerous item than a shotgun?

And did the registry of vehicles curb car accidents, I don't think so. But I see a harper majority in the making.

[Dave_ON]

And did the registry of vehicles curb car accidents, I don't think so. But I see a harper majority in the making.

Umm cars aren't registered with the intent that it reduces accidents. It's done to show ownership, and is a revenue (read tax) source for the province. Pet registrations also do not reduce animal attacks, nevertheless we're require to register dogs and cats in most urban centres, again to designate ownership and it's another revenue source for the city. Registration of most things is a fact of life, I guess I don't see why registering gun ownership is such a big deal. Admittedly I don't know much about the gun registry, do you have to also have a license? Seems fair you have to license or register most everything else in life, marriage, death, birth the list goes on.

[PIK]

Umm cars aren't registered with the intent that it reduces accidents. It's done to show ownership, and is a revenue (read tax) source for the province. Pet registrations also do not reduce animal attacks, nevertheless we're require to register dogs and cats in most urban centres, again to designate ownership and it's another revenue source for the city. Registration of most things is a fact of life, I guess I don't see why registering gun ownership is such a big deal. Admittedly I don't know much about the gun registry, do you have to also have a license? Seems fair you have to license or register most everything else in life, marriage, death, birth the list goes on.

The thing about it , is after the shooting in montreal,rock who was already looking at it, used this to force this feel good but useless idea on us and it pretty well seemed we were getting the blame for that man with mental health issues did. It did nothing to curb violence ,but it divided the country, it was a slap in the face for honest gun owners in the country. But the libs will never admit to this being a mistake.

[Dave_ON]

The thing about it , is after the shooting in montreal,rock who was already looking at it, used this to force this feel good but useless idea on us and it pretty well seemed we were getting the blame for that man with mental health issues did. It did nothing to curb violence ,but it divided the country, it was a slap in the face for honest gun owners in the country. But the libs will never admit to this being a mistake.

So is the gun registry a requirement on top of a license? Again I don't understand really all this is about. If it's a simple tax, like a pet, car, marriage etc registration I don't really see it as an issue.

[PIK]

So is the gun registry a requirement on top of a license? Again I don't understand really all this is about. If it's a simple tax, like a pet, car, marriage etc registration I don't really see it as an issue.

You need to take a course to get a hunting lic, then you take a course on getting a PAL which you need to buy a gun, to get one you also need to be aproved by the POLICE. To buy ammo,you need that PAL, and the seller puts your name in a book with date ,time, PAL#,what you bought and how much. So we are already registred, so this added one is the slap in the face. So what you have done is make it harder for honest peole ,to get a gun, but the CRIMINAL can still buy one in minutes. Weapon most used in killings in canada ,the knife.