Liberal Party of Canada's misinformation on Bill C-42

[Derek 2.0]

It's going to be an interesting campaign. It's going to be really easy for all of the other parties to paint him as a liar -- no matter what he answers, they'll be able to pull up a quote of him saying the opposite.

Without a doubt, in this case, the very fact that after Mulcair spoke to an NDP registry, several NDP MP (Charlie Angus) quickly "corrected him" in a public fashion........it is clear that the NDP does have a hidden agenda for the 2 million+ Canadian gun owners.

[waldo]

the very fact that after Mulcair spoke to an NDP registry

what did Mulcair say?

[waldo]

as the "gun grabbers"

imagine that... you lay down a lot of verbiage but somehow you can't speak directly to what was requested; again:

just how many gun types... the specific gun make... were shifted from legal to banned? And what was the official rationale provided as to why the shift was done? What was the nature of direct political guidance/directive involved?

.

[Derek 2.0]

what did Mulcair say?

Per the Toronto Star:

Tom Mulcair says a New Democrat government would revive the long-gun registry, minus the flaws that made the original registry so controversial.

The NDP leader says his party is committed to ensuring police have the ability to track firearms.

But it’s still working out the details of how to do that without running into the problems that plagued the Liberal-instituted registry that was scrapped by Stephen Harper’s Conservative government.

Hence the soon to be loud calls to explain said details, of said hidden agenda......if they don't, the Tories will for them.

[Derek 2.0]

imagine that... you lay down a lot of verbiage but somehow you can't speak directly to what was requested; again:

just how many gun types... the specific gun make... were shifted from legal to banned? And what was the official rationale provided as to why the shift was done? What was the nature of direct political guidance/directive involved?

.

I linked, from two Government sources, the exact criteria for all guns that were banned, in addition, guns that were banned by name, with a detailed list.

As to rationale and political guidance, as I said, I like the other 2 million+ legal gun owners have no idea why or how the then Liberal Government did what they did.....

If that is not "good enough" for the Waldo, then we're done.

RCMP CFC

Criminal Code

[waldo]

And significant costs were incurred because the software was screwed up time and again, and they spent much more on it and much more time implementing it, and it never worked properly. It was full of holes and inaccuracies.

yes, there were significant costs... some of which, again, resulted from the anti-registry efforts and provinces being less than cooperative in interfacing. Cost is simply a red-herring as, again, costs were a historical facet and the registry had moved into operational status, subject to relatively insignificant operating costs.

.

Well, this is from one of those rabid right-wingers, a reporter with the Toronto Star, but maybe you'll be interested in reading it anyway.

A pounding at the door the other morning; my windows rattled. I was upstairs at work. I don't always leave my desk to hear the good news about Jehovah.

The pounder was insistent. I went down, if only for the sake of the windows.

Oh, jeeze, the cops.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2010/01/29/fiorito_the_cops_came_and_took_my_gun.html

and here I thought the context was the supposed grabbing of guns shifted from legal to banned status. In any case, the author in your linked reference let his possession license lapse... he subsequently went though the process to reacquire his gun. I guess since there were no follow-up columns on the subject we might assume he got it back - yes? I mean, after all, what point would a pro-gunner have in speaking to a system that works to ensure licensing, hey?

.

[waldo]

Per the Toronto Star

and here I expected you'd quote the most recent days old comment... you know, the one that prompted you to resurrect this thread! Again, what did Mulcair say?

.

[waldo]

If that is not "good enough" for the Waldo, then we're done.

another of your standard weaselly answers. You spoke of previously designated legal guns that were changed to a banned status... would you like me to quote you? You can presume to drop a link that details prohibited weapons; however, that doesn't align with your initial premise... nor what I asked you for.

.

[Derek 2.0]

and here I expected you'd quote the most recent days old comment... you know, the one that prompted you to resurrect this thread! Again, what did Mulcair say?

.

I quoted it already:

“We have no intention of bringing back a gun registry,” he said. “The failure of the last gun registry, its phenomenal cost of $1 billion, and the fact that is was so inflexible — you know, a grandfather hunting with his grandson, and the slightest glitch in his papers and the only option was a criminal prosecution. The police have never asked for that. Now, I do want to make sure our police have the tools necessary . . . but the NDP has no intention whatsoever of bringing back the gun registry.”

And what, as I asked, are said tools? Late last year, Mulcair cited said tools as:

NDP Leader Tom Mulcair said Wednesday he wants to give police the ability to track every firearm in Canada through some form of a gun registry – just not the one the country had under the Liberals.

Hence my question regarding the NDP's hidden agenda.......so what gives?

[waldo]

what gives is you purposely ignore the most recent comment where Mulcair states the NDP has no intention... that's what gives.

[Derek 2.0]

another of your standard weaselly answers. You spoke of previously designated legal guns that were changed to a banned status... would you like me to quote you? You can presume to drop a link that details prohibited weapons; however, that doesn't align with your initial premise... nor what I asked you for.

.

The prohibited class was created by the Liberal's Firearms Act.......prior to said Liberal Firearm Act, said prohibited firearms were perfectly legal to purchase, posses and use.......

Prohibited firearms are banned......as in, if the Waldo obtained his firearms license today, the Waldo could not legally purchase a prohibited firearm, a firearm that was not prohibited ~20 years ago, prior to the creation of the (linked to) list.

[Derek 2.0]

what gives is you purposely ignore the most recent comment where Mulcair states the NDP has no intention... that's what gives.

I didn't ignore it, I quoted it...........what are said "tools" suggested by Mulcair? When he spoke to said "tools" last December, he spoke to the creation of an NDP "registry", different and better than the previous Liberal registry...........

So, the NDP can now outline their plans, or, as I said, we will do it for them, as there are over 2 million voters with a vested interest.

[waldo]

I didn't ignore it, I quoted it...........what are said "tools" suggested by Mulcair? When he spoke to said "tools" last December, he spoke to the creation of an NDP "registry", different and better than the previous Liberal registry...........

So, the NDP can now outline their plans, or, as I said, we will do it for them, as there are over 2 million voters with a vested interest.

"we will do it for them"! Is that "you and the party" again? If you would like to have a contest on the shifting/changing statements and positions of Stephen Harper, we can have some real fun here, hey! You choose to ignore the most recent days old statement... what tools from your/the party playbook are you following in that regard?

.

[waldo]

The prohibited class was created by the Liberal's Firearms Act.......prior to said Liberal Firearm Act, said prohibited firearms were perfectly legal to purchase, posses and use.......

no! Twas not the 1995 Firearms Act that created the prohibited class... per the RCMP:

- in 1968-1969 the categories of 'firearm,' 'restricted weapon' and 'prohibited weapon' were created for the first time.

- in 1977 new definitions were provided for prohibited and restricted weapons

- in 1991 new definitions were provided for prohibited and restricted weapons

did I miss the part in your link that designated all guns listed as prohibited in association with the 1995 act?... that none of the 3 prior initiatives (listed above) had any bearing on the history of prohibited guns?

[Derek 2.0]

no! Twas not the 1995 Firearms Act that created the prohibited class... per the RCMP:

- in 1968-1969 the categories of 'firearm,' 'restricted weapon' and 'prohibited weapon' were created for the first time.

- in 1977 new definitions were provided for prohibited and restricted weapons

- in 1991 new definitions were provided for prohibited and restricted weapons

did I miss the part in your link that designated all guns listed as prohibited in association with the 1995 act?... that none of the 3 prior initiatives (listed above) had any bearing on the history of prohibited guns?

What are you on about? As cited, the current definitions, created in the 1995 Liberal Firearms Act, which came into force December 1st 1998 are the laws that define what is a prohibited, restricted and a non-restricted firearm, of which (as already outlined) the banning by the then Liberal Government of the then new prohibited class.........

I don't know what 1969 law you're attempting to cite, the American Gun Control Act of 1968 perhaps? A presumptive Canadian law at that time, I would assume, sans your clarification, mirrored the American law of the previous year, and required serial numbers on all firearms then produced domestically or imported, likewise restricted the production, importation or sale of government surplus machine guns for the civilian market....a ban if you will, but said law did not limit the possession, sale or use of said machine guns already in circulation.......no banning of guns already in the possession of Canadians then.

The 1977 PET law saw the creation of our first attempt at gun licensing, the firearms acquisition license (FAC), which a presumptive gun owner required if they purchased a firearm(s), not for firearms they already owned, zero guns were banned as a result.

The 1991 PC law, post Polytechnique, introduced a waiting period, references for applicants and a required safety coarse. In addition, introduced magazine restrictions for semi-auto and select fire firearms, and (IIRC) banned the use of flechette and explosive ammunition....again, no guns were banned in this period.

Sorry, your outline is incorrect.........

Edited July 26, 2015 by Derek 2.0

[waldo]

The prohibited class was created by the Liberal's Firearms Act.......prior to said Liberal Firearm Act, said prohibited firearms were perfectly legal to purchase, posses and use.......

What are you on about? As cited, the current definitions, created in the 1995 Liberal Firearms Act, which came into force December 1st 1998 are the laws that define what is a prohibited, restricted and a non-restricted firearm, of which (as already outlined) the banning by the then Liberal Government of the then new prohibited class.........

Sorry, your outline is incorrect.........

no - your accounting is blatantly false! I will await your retraction/correction... again:

- in 1968-1969 the categories of 'firearm,' 'restricted weapon' and 'prohibited weapon' were created for the first time.

- in 1977 new definitions were provided for prohibited and restricted weapons

- in 1991 new definitions were provided for prohibited and restricted weapons

again, did I miss the part in your link that designated all guns listed as prohibited in association with the 1995 act?... that none of the 3 prior initiatives (listed above) had any bearing on the history of prohibited guns?

.

[Argus]

yes, there were significant costs... some of which, again, resulted from the anti-registry efforts and provinces being less than cooperative in interfacing. Cost is simply a red-herring as, again, costs were a historical facet and the registry had moved into operational status, subject to relatively insignificant operating costs.

I see, sooooo, none of that will happen with a new gun registry? The provinces will all cooperate. There'll be no resistance from gun owners. And, of course, the software will be perfectly designed and all the rules easily set in place at a minimum cost. Is that the story? The cost of the last one was $2 billion. How does the NDP intend to pay for this enormous program?

.

and here I thought the context was the supposed grabbing of guns shifted from legal to banned status.

And why would you think that? My words were in clear English. I stated, in response to your claim that cars are registered, that the police don't show up at your door if you forget to renew your licence and take your car away. You asked for evidence this happened. Now I've provided you with specific evidence that is exactly what happens and you're trying to weasel around as if that wasn't at all what we were discussing.

This incredible dishonesty of yours (along with your insulting 'tude) are why so many refuse to even address you here.

Edited July 26, 2015 by Argus

[Derek 2.0]

no - your accounting is blatantly false! I will await your retraction/correction... again:

- in 1968-1969 the categories of 'firearm,' 'restricted weapon' and 'prohibited weapon' were created for the first time.

- in 1977 new definitions were provided for prohibited and restricted weapons

- in 1991 new definitions were provided for prohibited and restricted weapons

again, did I miss the part in your link that designated all guns listed as prohibited in association with the 1995 act?... that none of the 3 prior initiatives (listed above) had any bearing on the history of prohibited guns?

.

Well done, and in 1969:

The categories of 'firearm,' 'restricted weapon' and 'prohibited weapon' were created for the first time. This ended confusion over specific types of weapons and allowed the creation of specific legislative controls for each of the new categories. The new definitions included powers to designate weapons to be prohibited or restricted by Order- in-Council. The minimum age to get a minor's permit to possess firearms was increased to 16. For the first time, police had preventive powers to search for firearms and seize them if they had a warrant from a judge, and if they had reasonable grounds to believe that possession endangered the safety of the owner or any other person, even though no offence had been committed. The current registration system, requiring a separate registration certificate for each restricted weapon, took effect in 1969.

What firearms were deemed prohibited and restricted, contrasted with the Liberal's Firearms Act of 1995? And what guns were banned with that legislation? (none)

In 1977:

Bill C-51 passed in the House of Commons. It then received Senate approval and Royal Assent on August 5. The two biggest changes included requirements for Firearms Acquisition Certificates (FACs) and requirements for Firearms and Ammunition Business Permits. And, for the first time, Chief Firearms Officer positions were introduced in the provinces. Other changes included provisions dealing with new offences, search and seizure powers, increased penalties, and new definitions for prohibited and restricted weapons. Fully automatic weapons became classified as prohibited firearms unless they had been registered as restricted weapons before January 1, 1978. Individuals could no longer carry a restricted weapon to protect property. Mandatory minimum sentences were re-introduced. This time, they were in the form of a 1-14 year consecutive sentence for the actual use (not mere possession) of a firearm to commit an indictable offence.

What firearms were banned with the 1977 legislation? (none)

In 1991:

Bill C-17 was introduced. It passed in the House of Commons on November 7, received Senate approval and Royal Assent on December 5, 1991, then came into force between 1992 and 1994. Changes to the FAC system included requiring applicants to provide a photograph and two references; imposing a mandatory 28-day waiting period for an FAC; a mandatory requirement for safety training; and expanding the application form to provide more background information. Bill C-17 also required a more detailed screening check of FAC applicants.

Some other major changes included: increased penalties for firearm-related crimes; new Criminal Code offences; new definitions for prohibited and restricted weapons; new regulations for firearms dealers; clearly defined regulations for the safe storage, handling and transportation of firearms; and a requirement that firearm regulations be drafted for review by Parliamentary committee before being made by Governor-in-Council. A major focus of the new legislation was the need for controls on military, para-military and high-firepower guns. New controls in this area included the prohibition of large-capacity cartridge magazines for automatic and semi-automatic firearms, the prohibition of automatic firearms that had been converted to avoid the 1978 prohibition (existing owners were exempted); and a series of Orders-in-Council prohibiting or restricting most para-military rifles and some types of non-sporting ammunition.

What firearms were banned in 1991? (none)

Thank you for confirming my point!!!!! At no time, until the passing of the 1995 Liberal Firearms Act, was the sale, possession and use of any lawfully obtained firearm within Canada negated by Government legislation.....

[waldo]

I see, sooooo, none of that will happen with a new gun registry? The provinces will all cooperate. There'll be no resistance from gun owners. And, of course, the software will be perfectly designed and all the rules easily set in place at a minimum cost. Is that the story? The cost of the last one was $2 billion. How does the NDP intend to pay for this enormous program?

talk about, as you say, YOUR incredible dishonesty! Your/the standard talking point is to rail on about the registry costs. When I speak to a most significant influence on those costs, when I speak to the fact the working registry had shifted into an operational mode, subject to relatively minor operating costs, you choose to ignore all that and leap to a "new registry" boogeyman... whether an Opposition party actually intends it, or not. It was your boy Harper that pissed away the results of all those costs and all that effort to gain provincial support/cooperation... to build the framework for a working registry. Again, talk about, as you say, YOUR incredible dishonesty!

.

And why would you think that? My words were in clear English. I stated, in response to your claim that cars are registered, that the police don't show up at your door if you forget to renew your licence and take your car away. You asked for evidence this happened. Now I've provided you with specific evidence that is exactly what happens and you're trying to weasel around as if that wasn't at all what we were discussing.

This incredible dishonesty of yours (along with your insulting 'tude) are why so many refuse to even address you here.

again, as you say, talk about YOUR incredible dishonesty! I absolutely made no such claim - quote it! What I stated was in direct relation to D2.0's gun-grabbing reference to the 90's shifting of (some number/type of) existing legal guns to a prohibited status... I asked for qualification detail in that regard. Of course, D2.0 doesn't do qualification! So... in, as you say, YOUR incredible dishonesty, you drop a turd-reference to a whining reporter who allowed his license to lapse... had his gun seized in regards that NO LICENSING lapse, paid for a new license, got his gun back! You know, within a working system intended to ensure related firearms were licensed. So... you're not only against registering firearms, you don't want them licensed as well, hey! Here, let me quote you exactly what I said... relative to, as you say, YOUR incredible dishonesty that falsely describes my claim, YOUR incredible dishonesty that shifts the context of discussion; what I said:

hey now! While we wait for D2.0 to speak to his declared 90's gun-grabbers, why not fill in for him! I mean, after all, with such an emphatic statement as you've just made, surely you can back it up with examples of "gun-grabbing". Surely. Don't forget to speak to the specific type of "gun grabbed"... cause, surely you're just not beaking off about the hypothetical, right?

.

[waldo]

Well done, and in 1969:

What firearms were deemed prohibited and restricted, contrasted with the Liberal's Firearms Act of 1995? And what guns were banned with that legislation? (none)

In 1977:

What firearms were banned with the 1977 legislation? (none)

In 1991:

What firearms were banned in 1991? (none)

Thank you for confirming my point!!!!! At no time, until the passing of the 1995 Liberal Firearms Act, was the sale, possession and use of any lawfully obtained firearm within Canada negated by Government legislation.....

no - this is just another of your typical weasel responses! You stated the 95 act created the prohibited class. You are incorrect and you now have the audacity to actually quote from my reference that categorically proves you were incorrect... while you refuse to admit YOU WERE INCORRECT. I also asked you, most pointedly: "again, did I miss the part in your link that designated all guns listed as prohibited in association with the 1995 act?... that none of the 3 prior initiatives (listed above) had any bearing on the history of prohibited guns?" So, in 69, 77 and 91, prohibited class was created (in 69) and revised subsequently, twice, in 77 and 91. Apparently, it is your position that through all that iterative buildup of the creation and revision of the prohibited class, none of that iteration had any influence and play in what the latest revision (the 95 act) presented.

.

[poochy]

Still waiting for an explanation about how a piece of paper that says 'registered' prevents any firearm from being used i a crime, or somehow reduces the availability of illegal guns. 23 years and counting.

[Derek 2.0]

no - this is just another of your typical weasel responses! You stated the 95 act created the prohibited class. You are incorrect and you now have the audacity to actually quote from my reference that categorically proves you were incorrect... while you refuse to admit YOU WERE INCORRECT. I also asked you, most pointedly: "again, did I miss the part in your link that designated all guns listed as prohibited in association with the 1995 act?... that none of the 3 prior initiatives (listed above) had any bearing on the history of prohibited guns?" So, in 69, 77 and 91, prohibited class was created (in 69) and revised subsequently, twice, in 77 and 91. Apparently, it is your position that through all that iterative buildup of the creation and revision of the prohibited class, none of that iteration had any influence and play in what the latest revision (the 95 act) presented.

.

Weasel response? In both my Government links pertaining to the guns banned by the 1995 Liberal Firearms Act, the detailed list and criteria for then guns to be banned is clearly highlighted, including specific models and calibers of firearms, likewise both the date the legislation was tabled (1995) and when it came into force (1998)........

Now the onus is on you, if you want to continue, and cite just one model of firearm that was banned with legislation in 1969, 1977 and 1991 (feel free to include anytime in between, up to the Liberal's Firearms Act) versus my cited sources.........feel free to name just 3 specific firearms banned within the ~25 years prior to the Liberal's gun grabbing in the 1990s........

I'll save you the Google-Fu efforts, you won't be able to........

[eyeball]

Still waiting for an explanation about how a piece of paper that says 'registered' prevents any firearm from being used i a crime, or somehow reduces the availability of illegal guns. 23 years and counting.

It doesn't, that's why they need to be grabbed, chipped, GPS'ed...whatever.

In any case I think ammunition control might actually do more to alleviate the problems that come from guns. Guns don't kill people, bullets do.

[Smallc]

It doesn't, that's why they need to be grabbed, chipped, GPS'ed...whatever.

Fascism much?

[eyeball]

No...rainbow kitten.