poochy Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 I do find it amusing when people talk about dog whistle politics and the conservatives, perhaps it's the, all things progressive, or at least any one persons version of what is progressive must be good attitude that's so pervasive among liberals. This is just one example, but frankly the liberals play this sort of game with the voters just like the conservatives, and if you're the one hearing the whistle it just means that your just a dog of a slightly different color. It doesn't matter of course that a piece of paper doesn't at all prevent you from taking your handgun somewhere you shouldn't, this is about liberals buying votes, they all do it. http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/firearms-groups-apoplectic-after-liberals-promise-new-gun-control-measures Quote
cybercoma Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 It's not a dog whistle when he just comes out and says, "we will institute new gun control measures." Quote
Argus Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 It's appealing to the ignorant urban voter who has no clue what gun control measures are in place now. For example, one of the measures he's promised to reverse is one where those with legal, registered handguns had to call up a government office every time they took their hand gun to the gun range (the only place they are legally allowed to take it) in order to get them to fax them a permit to do so. The Tories had changed that so that once a person was a member of a gun club and the club signed off on it, they could then take their hand gun to the gun range without further permits. I think that's a basic, common sense rule, and I can't imagine how going back to the old wasteful one would lead to any kind of improvement in safety, just an increase in the number of government employees doing useless work. Much like the Liberal's last foray into gun control, the long gun registry, this seems to designed for purely political gain, without any indication it will help control gun violence in the least. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
scribblet Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 ............ Much like the Liberal's last foray into gun control, the long gun registry, this seems to designed for purely political gain, without any indication it will help control gun violence in the least. Exactly. Targeting hunters and legal gun owners won't stop anything. At least Mulcair has said he won't bring back the registry. Quote Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province
waldo Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 I do find it amusing when people talk about dog whistle politics yes, MLW member cybercoma... as you state! It's not a dog whistle when he just comes out and says, "we will institute new gun control measures." I find it amusing when people don't know what 'dog-whistle politics' means... a political messaging employing coded language that appears to mean one thing to the general population but has an additional, different or more specific resonance for a targeted subgroup. Quote
The_Squid Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 So those who commented on the article didn't actually read the article. It said nothing about a registry. From the article: The Liberals specify that they would not re-introduce the long-gun registry ... ...restore the requirement for a specific permit to transport restricted and prohibited weapons to and from such locations as a shooting range or gunsmith. Under the Conservative law, the authorization to transport the weapon became automatic with the granting of a licence. The Liberals would also repeal a section of C-42 that gives cabinet, not police, final say over which firearms are restricted. The Conservatives used the new power in August to reverse an RCMP ban on certain Czech- and Swiss-made rifles that closely resemble prohibited automatic firearms. ...modify membership of the Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee, which advises the government and which critics say tilts too much in favour of gun-owners. Trudeau wants committee membership to include public health advocates, women’s group representatives and police officers. ...require enhanced background checks for anyone buying a handgun or other restricted firearm, it would require anyone selling a firearm to confirm that the buyer holds a valid licence and it would implement long-delayed regulations requiring the marking of imported guns. Vendors would be required to keep records of their inventory and sales to assist police in investigating crimes. Dog whistle politics? It's not dog whistle to propose measures on gun control. It's not like they proposed more gun control on Muslims, and not on other groups, for instance... see the difference? Quote
cybercoma Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 It's not like they proposed more gun control on Muslims, and not on other groups, for instance Even that wouldn't be a dog whistle, unless they said something like, "you have to eat a BLT in order to get a gun license." Quote
waldo Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/firearms-groups-apoplectic-after-liberals-promise-new-gun-control-measures is there a problem? - The Liberals specify that they would not re-introduce the long-gun registry - Trudeau is promising to repeal elements of Bill C-42, dubbed the Common Sense Firearms Licensing Act by the Conservatives, which came into force last June. The Liberals would: - restore the requirement for a specific permit to transport restricted and prohibited weapons to and from such locations as a shooting range or gunsmith. - repeal a section of C-42 that gives cabinet, not police, final say over which firearms are restricted. - the Liberals would: - modify membership of the Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee, which advises the government and which critics say tilts too much in favour of gun-owners. Trudeau wants committee membership to include public health advocates, women’s group representatives and police officers. - require enhanced background checks for anyone buying a handgun or other restricted firearm - require anyone selling a firearm to confirm that the buyer holds a valid licence - implement long-delayed regulations requiring the marking of imported guns. - require vendors to keep records of their inventory and sales to assist police in investigating crimes. Quote
Argus Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 - restore the requirement for a specific permit to transport restricted and prohibited weapons to and from such locations as a shooting range or gunsmith. Strikes me as a stupid waste of time and money. As for the rest, can you suggest any way any of it would help prevent gun violence? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
waldo Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 Strikes me as a stupid waste of time and money. As for the rest, can you suggest any way any of it would help prevent gun violence? your opinion is noted. I have no interest in getting sucked into another long drawn out discussion with pro-gunners who refuse to accept cited study analysis or the results of, for example, cited U.S. gun-control advocacy groups analysis that draws 'degrees of association' between U.S. states with stronger gun laws and lower gun related deaths. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 For example, one of the measures he's promised to reverse is one where those with legal, registered handguns had to call up a government office every time they took their hand gun to the gun range (the only place they are legally allowed to take it) in order to get them to fax them a permit to do so. The Tories had changed that so that once a person was a member of a gun club and the club signed off on it, they could then take their hand gun to the gun range without further permits. I think that's a basic, common sense rule, and I can't imagine how going back to the old wasteful one would lead to any kind of improvement in safety, just an increase in the number of government employees doing useless work. That's not the case, prior to Sept 2 2015, restricted gun owners (such as myself) had to obtain (after getting their license) a separate one-time long term Authorization to Transport, which included the conditions on which said restricted firearms could be transported. Post Sept 2 2015, the exact same conditions of the once separate LTATT are now included into said owners RPAL license.........IOW, we went from a license and a ATT permit, to a combined license/ATT. Nothing else has changed. Quote
Argus Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 your opinion is noted. I have no interest in getting sucked into another long drawn out discussion with pro-gunners who refuse to accept cited study analysis What the hell are you talking about? I'm not asking for studies on whether gun control reduces murder or whatnot. I'm specifically asking on whether the things he's mentioned have any chance of reducing gun crime. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
The_Squid Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 Strikes me as a stupid waste of time and money. As for the rest, can you suggest any way any of it would help prevent gun violence? Some of these are very good ideas. I question why "women's groups" should specifically have a seat on the committee, but law enforcement and looking at public health studies should certainly be part of it. enhanced background checks.... requirements of proper record keeping by gun sellers... marking of guns... all good ideas. Quote
poochy Posted October 7, 2015 Author Report Posted October 7, 2015 Yes, its a minor, paperwork change, it puts no one in harms way, this is just the liberals doing what they do. Again, you have a loose screw somewhere if you believe a handgun owner cannot do bad things with his handgun, or take it somewhere he shouldn't just because the liberals want him to get a piece of paper anytime he wants to take it somewhere new. It is exactly as effective as the piece of paper that said 'registered' was at preventing illegal acts with a firearm, that liberal dog whistle only cost a billion or so and did exactly nothing to prevent crime. Quote
Argus Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 enhanced background checks.... requirements of proper record keeping by gun sellers... marking of guns... all good ideas. You realize we already have that, right? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
poochy Posted October 7, 2015 Author Report Posted October 7, 2015 enhanced background checks.... requirements of proper record keeping by gun sellers... marking of guns... Already done, gun registry (did nothing to prevent crime), already done. Though I will commend you on your excellent high frequency hearing. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 is there a problem? - The Liberals specify that they would not re-introduce the long-gun registry - Trudeau is promising to repeal elements of Bill C-42, dubbed the Common Sense Firearms Licensing Act by the Conservatives, which came into force last June. The Liberals would: - restore the requirement for a specific permit to transport restricted and prohibited weapons to and from such locations as a shooting range or gunsmith. For what gain? All the previous conditions of the LTATT are now included in ones license, nothing has changed in regards to conditions, other than going from a required license and permit, to a combined license/permit. - modify membership of the Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee, which advises the government and which critics say tilts too much in favour of gun-owners. Trudeau wants committee membership to include public health advocates, women’s group representatives and police officers. The CFAC already includes retired and serving police officers.......I don't understand what women's groups and public health advocates would bring to a forum encompassing technical aspects of new firearms requiring a FRT number. - require enhanced background checks for anyone buying a handgun or other restricted firearm What does that mean? What enhancements over the already existing background checks, as required by the Liberal's Firearms Act, will be required? - require anyone selling a firearm to confirm that the buyer holds a valid licence That is already a requirement, and not only for firearms, but also ammo sales. - implement long-delayed regulations requiring the marking of imported guns. All Imported guns are already marked with country of production (and even factory stamps) and either year of production or said year can be determined through the serial numbers, be they from the United States, Europe, Russia or China etc. - require vendors to keep records of their inventory and sales to assist police in investigating crimes. You mean a backdoor registry? Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 It's not a dog whistle when he just comes out and says, "we will institute new gun control measures." I agree, its a wedge that the Liberal's own Wayne Easter warned his own party against at their previous policy convention.......it should noted, the Greens and to a lesser extent, the NDP, have avoided. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 Strikes me as a stupid waste of time and money. As for the rest, can you suggest any way any of it would help prevent gun violence? It won't, the Greens of all parties, have actually suggested increasing measures to prevent smuggling and the black market sale of firearms in Canada..... Quote
waldo Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 .......I don't understand what women's groups and public health advocates would bring to a forum encompassing technical aspects of new firearms requiring a FRT number. I trust prior examples of weasel word tactics will not rule here... did not realize that was the single sole domain of the CFAC? A reply like that is wholly disingenuous! Quote
Smeelious Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 I think this is another "Weapon of mass distraction" I also feel like while the gun control debate is a valid debate to have in the USA, it somewhat less valid in Canada....Valid maybe isn't the right word. "Pressing" is probably better. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 I trust prior examples of weasel word tactics will not rule here... did not realize that was the single sole domain of the CFAC? A reply like that is wholly disingenuous! That is the purpose of the CFAC, to advise the elected Government on firearms classification policy.....I don't see the gain of said inclusions........ In my opinion, the CFAC should be handed over to Industry Canada and the RCMP. Quote
waldo Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 All Imported guns are already marked with country of production (and even factory stamps) and either year of production or said year can be determined through the serial numbers, be they from the United States, Europe, Russia or China etc. why would Harper Conservatives refuse to sign the UN Arms Control agreement... they voted for it at the UN and then proceeded to abstain. 131 countries have signed the treaty... all NATO countries other than Canada have signed the treaty. oh wait... is it just a coincidence that these gun markings are a part of that same UN agreement? Feds Put Off Gun-Marking Regulations Aimed At Helping Police Trace Them The federal government is delaying implementation of regulations intended to help police trace crime guns — the seventh time it has put off the measures. Just days before the federal election call, the government quietly published a notice deferring the firearm marking regulations until June 1, 2017. The measures would require specific, identifiable markings be stamped on firearms. They had been slated to take effect Dec. 1 of this year. The July 29 notice from Public Safety Canada says the delay will allow the government to continue consultations "with a broad range of stakeholders" — despite six previous delays in enacting the regulations, first drafted in 2004. . Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 why would Harper Conservatives refuse to sign the UN Arms Control agreement... they voted for it at the UN and then proceeded to abstain. 131 countries have signed the treaty... all NATO countries other than Canada have signed the treaty. oh wait... is it just a coincidence that these gun markings are a part of that same UN agreement? Feds Put Off Gun-Marking Regulations Aimed At Helping Police Trace Them . The United States hasn't implemented it, which would require approval by Congress.......I would expect, after the Second American Civil War, the new United States Government would reject said treaty Joking aside, for sporting arms, much of the aversion here comes down to cost and warranty issues. First, who is going to pay for said country import stamping (Simply a "CA" stamped on firearms for the Canadian market), and second, the effect of said after marking stamping, on said firearm's factory corrosion resistant treatments......IOW, who gets the bill and who is going to pay for my firearm to be retreated after its been stamped and starts to rust? For the Americans themselves, this is less a concern, since much of the import measures are already a condition per the 1968 Gun Control Act......hence why most European gun makers produce their guns intended for the US market in the United States.......there, it will never be passed by Congress due to the simple fact that includes "UN" and firearms in the title.......... Quote
waldo Posted October 7, 2015 Report Posted October 7, 2015 (edited) That is the purpose of the CFAC, to advise the elected Government on firearms classification policy..... further disingenuous comment! You better update Public Safety Canada as, for example, one of their press releases seems to suggest otherwise! Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee Meets to Discuss Progress on Repealing the Long-Gun Registry Today, the Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee (CFAC) met to discuss progress made on the Government of Canada's Ending the Long-Gun Registry Act, as part of a two day meeting on improving effective firearms regulations in Canada.Comprised of 12 members who are civilian firearms users, some with extensive law enforcement experience and others with a background in public policy issues, the CFAC provides subject-specific advice and expertise to the Government of Canada on improving the effectiveness of firearms control in Canada. The CFAC was formed in 2006 as part of the Government's consultative process on firearms control measures. and yes, the committee shouldn't be skewed by a disproportionate number of 'gun enthusiasts'... this list of recommendations provided to former Harper Conservative Minister of Public Safety, Vic Toews speaks for itself. Reaction to that document was so negative by a significant grouping of stakeholders to the issue of gun related violence/death... so negative, Harper had no choice but to distance himself from it... “that document does not represent the government’s position”. the CFAC should also include, for example, police officers, victims of gun violence, public policy experts, people working to prevent suicide, etc.. Public Health and the Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee Edited October 7, 2015 by waldo Quote
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.