On Target
Via Aaron Wherry, Iggy's gun registry proposals:
Seems like a reasonable compromise to me. And it must also seem like a reasonable compromise to the 8 Liberal MPs who voted for Candice Hoeppner’s private members bill to abolish the gun registry - Ignatieff said MPs who vote for her bill on third reading will be punished and, after the abortion fiasco, I assume he's made sure his ducks are lined up first for this one. (Right?)
So what all of this means is that the fate of the gun registry now rests in the hands of a dozen NDP MPs who voted to scrap the registry last fall. Fairly or unfairly, Layton knows he'll get the blame for killing the registry if he doesn't whip the vote on this one. My guess is that's not what Jack wants, and enough NDP holdouts will have a change of heart, helping to shoot down Hoeppner's bill.
First, we’d change the law, so that people who forget to register their gun can be issued a ticket, rather than face a criminal charge. This will give front line officers the tools you need to distinguish an honest mistake from a threat to public safety. Someone who habitually breaks the law and flouts the regulations should be treated far differently from someone who makes a one-time mistake. One kind of behavior is criminal, the other isn’t. And you need the appropriate tools to deal with each situation. That’s a message we heard loud and clear.
Second, we’ll permanently eliminate fees for new licenses, renewals, and upgrades.
And third, we’ll streamline paperwork, to make registration as quick and easy as possible.
Seems like a reasonable compromise to me. And it must also seem like a reasonable compromise to the 8 Liberal MPs who voted for Candice Hoeppner’s private members bill to abolish the gun registry - Ignatieff said MPs who vote for her bill on third reading will be punished and, after the abortion fiasco, I assume he's made sure his ducks are lined up first for this one. (Right?)
So what all of this means is that the fate of the gun registry now rests in the hands of a dozen NDP MPs who voted to scrap the registry last fall. Fairly or unfairly, Layton knows he'll get the blame for killing the registry if he doesn't whip the vote on this one. My guess is that's not what Jack wants, and enough NDP holdouts will have a change of heart, helping to shoot down Hoeppner's bill.
Labels: Candice Hoeppner, gun registry, Jack Layton
posted by calgarygrit at
7:42 p.m.
15 Comments:
The Conservatives have 144 MPs plus Andre Arthur and Guergis who will both vote for the kill the registry bill. Hopefully Jack cracks the whip, but it will take a real hands on deck effort to ensure the bill fails. Fewer than 10 MPs need "come down with the flu" in order to assure the bill passes. So Iggy and Layon better make damn well sure that their MPs are in the House that day. Abstention could be just about as consequntial as voting for the bill when it comes down to it.
By
Anonymous, at 8:14 p.m.
You still ignore the question - what do you do about the thousands of people who refuse to register their guns?
Are they criminals and do you lock them up?
To them its a principle and any compromise that continues to ignore their opinion is of no use.
Either we have a law or we don't.
By
Tom, at 8:52 p.m.
I'm not aware of any proposal from any Party to eliminate the gun registry.
Hoeppner's Bill was to eliminate the long-gun registry, which is a very different beast.
By
Paul, at 8:59 p.m.
Ah yes! that bill from the anorexic twiggy wannabe with the mullet.
This is good for Iggy, he is starting to show leadership in his party.
NDP will be tricky though, lately they seem to show more support for Harpercons than not. Hence another good strategic move for Iggy, if this fails, NDP gets the blame.
Anonymous: As for Guergis; think very carefully now. She was after all kicked out of Con caucus in a humiliating way by Steve, do you think she is going to cooperative with him??
By
ck, at 9:13 p.m.
"Ah yes! that bill from the anorexic twiggy wannabe with the mullet."
Why do some of you libs lower the level of discussion with remarks like this?
Please, CK, give me your take on Hedy Fry or Marlene Jennings.
So childish...
By
Anonymous, at 9:19 p.m.
I have a question for Tom...
What make you think it is "thousands"?
I would venture a guess that the number is in the HUNDREDS of thousands, or perhaps higher.
A study was conducted before the implementation of C-68 to try and determine the number of firearms in Canada, which of course was impossible, but the number was pegged at between 14 and 19 million.
Yet the Libs claimed over 90% compliance with 7 million firearms in the system.
Where did the other guns go? Who is lying?
By
Jim, at 9:23 p.m.
Why don;t we want to register? Aside from the obvious that it cannot help the police, the real reason the police and leftists like the registry is that it is a shopping list for confiscation. Case in point, the RCMP has "reclassified" two legal, firearms, one restricted and one unrestricted, as prohibited and issued orders to registered users to turn them in with no compensation. These two guns, a rifle and a shotgun, were purchased legally and in good faith, were registered in good faith, and now the RCMP has changed their mind and demands their confiscation. THAT'S why gun owners hate the registry.
By
The Rat, at 10:59 p.m.
Rat, those are the same reasons that the RCMP want a legal grow-op registry. And this approach to 'decriminalize' gun offences, like their attempt with pot, will satisfy no one.
I'm pretty left of centre, but I see no good reason and many bad ones for the state having a list of guns and their owners.
By
Anonymous, at 11:11 p.m.
You still ignore the question - what do you do about the thousands of people who refuse to register their guns?
Are they criminals and do you lock them up?
To them its a principle and any compromise that continues to ignore their opinion is of no use.
Either we have a law or we don't.
Well, if people willingly break the law, I suspect you'd deal with them the same way you would with people who fail to register their cars, pets, etc.
By
calgarygrit, at 9:28 a.m.
The Rat - You say it doesn't help the police. The police say it does. While I'm sure you know better than them, you could see why Iggy would take their word for it over yours, wouldn't you?
By
calgarygrit, at 9:29 a.m.
"Well, if people willingly break the law, I suspect you'd deal with them"
I'v read there are a few hundred thousand who refuse to register their guns as an act of civil disobeience. It would cost the government billions to prosecute them all. There is a gun owners website that had all the figures.
When you take all the people who refuse to register, add in the exempt aboriginals and the criminals who of course don't register, the registry is useless.
The money wasted on the long arm registry would have been better used buying high tech lab equipment etc.
The gun registry is not about fighting crime, it is about the idea of government control over citizens.
By
nuna d. above, at 12:21 p.m.
Second, we’ll permanently eliminate fees for new licenses, renewals, and upgrades.
Wonderful, so I, the taxpayer, have to pay for it? That's crap.
In Calgary, I have to register my cats. And who pays for it? I do. I don't even know why I have to register my neutered, indoors-only cats, but apparently they pose some kind of threat or cost to the community? STUPID.
Frigging big-brother governments. Grumble grumble.
By
Robert Vollman, at 12:27 p.m.
"Well, if people willingly break the law, I suspect you'd deal with them ..."
Hands up, if you've never been guilty of exceeding the speed limit. Anyone? Bueller?
Hands up if you've ever turned yourself in at the police station after you've been guilty of speeding?
It's nice to make arguments about people "willingly breaking the law" but that's something ordinary Canadians do on a daily basis.
By
Paul, at 7:29 p.m.
Rat, rat, where's the tinfoil hat?
By
Anonymous, at 7:46 p.m.
"The Rat - You say it doesn't help the police. The police say it does. While I'm sure you know better than them, you could see why Iggy would take their word for it over yours, wouldn't you?"
The "Police" you say? I thought it was the two Chiefs of police orgs, and a union. I don't know what your experience has been but mine has been pretty consistent in that organizations rarely represent the grassroots, they usually represent a "political class". That political class is often out of touch, and may be influenced by other issues. The Chiefs of police are made up mainly of city police from the much more urban East and a couple of larger cities in the West. Does that sound familiar? It sounds to me like the same areas that elect Liberals.
But putting all that aside, aren't you the least bit concerned that perhaps the police are less interested in rights and freedoms and more interested in controlling the population? Is there no alternative reason, something other than "safety" that might lead large urban police forces to like the registry? Have you read much about the seizures of firearms in the GTA, police showing up at doors and demanding guns from owners whose licenses have lapsed? Could it possibly be that the urban police like the registry because it allows them to seize guns? You Liberals asked me to choose my Canada and the one I chose isn't one where the police steal private property they disapprove of.
By
The Rat, at 9:05 p.m.
Post a Comment
<< Home