Steven Harper is all about the guns. Harper wants to repeal the long gun registry. He is also all about the mandatory minimum sentences for crimes involving guns too. Sound like a conflict of interest, not if you happen to be a conservative politician.
“Prime Minister Stephen Harper says the federal long-gun registry will someday be scrapped, regardless of what happens to a Tory backbencher’s bill on the issue when Parliament returns next week”
Way to go Steve, your dedication to non-issues is impressive. The LGR is vitally important to Canada’s national interest and well being.
“He again denounced the registry, which was introduced by the Liberal government of Jean Chrétien in 1995, as a “large-scale operation that targeted the wrong people” — including hunters, farmers, outdoorsmen and women, as well as police officers “who understand the reality of these communities.”
“These people will never accept this registry because they know it is ineffective and wasteful, and the party I lead will not rest until the day it is abolished,” Harper said to applause”
Wow. I am surprised his message was not proceeded with a “this speech is for my conservative rural base…”
Compromise, in a minority government situation? What exactly is Mr.Layton smoking? Reasonable debate on a contentious issue? Unheard of, at least in this particular instance of Conservative Party minority governance.
bleatmop
Mystro
The Arbourist
Dead Wild Roses 
8 comments
September 18, 2010 at 11:05 am
Rory Rickwood
14 long Shadows
During a cold December day, a madman was an actor
in a play
A campus was his stage and the real world so far
away
He delivered his lines in a fast and hectic pace
as a black veil fell across Montreal’s face
Brave, intelligent women casting 14 long shadows,
Brave, intelligent women holding hands in a meadow
L’acteur odieux qui prétend être Gendarme
Personne penserait un besoin pour une alarme
Un esprit tordu qui cherche des femmes avec son fusil
Pourquoi oh pourquoi faire il veut créer tel mal
Brave, intelligent women casting 14 long shadows,
Brave, intelligent women holding hands in a meadow
Hopes, dreams and children not begotten
We can assure our Sisters they will not be forgotten
The curtains lower to the shouts of “Esprit Tordu”, “Esprit Tordu”
yea, “Esprit Tordu”
And the dimming of lights turns everything blue
The noise and reactions were painfully loud
as the mad actor gave a final bow
to the crowd
Brave, intelligent women casting 14 long shadows,
Brave, intelligent women holding hands in a meadow
Hopes, dreams and children not begotten
We can assure our Sisters they will not be forgotten
During a cold December day a madman presented a play
and our sisters of École Polytechnique could only
pray
Our great land of hopes and dreams has such majesty
and all would have been better if there was a
registry
Brave, intelligent women casting 14 long shadows
Brave, intelligent women holding hands in a meadow.
(Dedicated to: Genevieve, Helene, Nathalie, Barbara, Anne-Marie, Maud, Maryse, Anne-Marie, Maryes, Sonia, Michele, Annie, Barbara, and Annie.)
LikeLike
September 18, 2010 at 11:19 am
JimBobby
And yet, Harper voted FOR the registry in 1995 when it was first implemented. He even went against his Reform Party in doing so.
There will be no compromise, as you correctly say. There have been several instances where the majority of MPs voted for something and the Harper dictatorship refused to respect the will of the majority Votes on Kelowna, Kyoto and US war resisters are a few high profile examples.
The upcoming vote is a win-win for the Cons. If they win the vote, they can crow about delivering on their promises. If they lose, they can argue that the loss demonstrates the need for them to get a majority and it provides a continuing source of revenue from anti-registry fund-raising campaigns.
LikeLike
September 18, 2010 at 1:41 pm
The Arbourist
And yet, Harper voted FOR the registry in 1995
Consistency has long given way to political expediency. I wonder why they poll people as to why they have so little faith in our political class, when you can easily find such easy examples of how self-serving politicians are. The connection is obvious.
The upcoming vote is a win-win for the Cons.
Do not forget they are segmenting the rural voters who supported the NDP as well. As apparently registering your gun is just a little to much hassle.
LikeLike
September 18, 2010 at 3:33 pm
JimBobby
As apparently registering your gun is just a little to much hassle.
I find it a bigass hassle registerin’ my dog every year, too. Ol’ Spot don’t like wearin’ that jingly tag, neither. I ain’t got a car but if I did, I’d hafta pay big bucks every year an’ register it, too. I had to register my domain, http://www.jimbobby.com an’ they make me pay every year.
I figger more folks got cars an’ dogs than got guns. An’, I figger plenty of gun owners ain’t too riled up about the registry. There’s a few loudmouths with guns bossin’ everybody around. Sorta like the Taliban.
LikeLike
September 25, 2010 at 10:27 am
Vern R. Kaine
I might be missing something here, but I thought there were three major criticisms of the gun registry:
1) it’s ridiculously overblown cost (which was grossly and deliberately lied about when it was proposed)
2) the fact that criminals don’t register their guns
3) the treating of everyday people as criminals
Isn’t saying that Conservatives want to “kill” the registry just rhetoric from either the party itself, or citizens? From what I read, they’re not wanting to keep gun ownership anonymous, but rather to shift the onus of registration from gun owners to gun sellers. This, I would think, would be far more effective and far easier and less costly to administer to anyone that can count.
Also, let’s face a reality here – the problem isn’t with legal guns, it’s the illegal ones. Explain to me how this registry as it stands does anything to affect this?
That’s #1 and #2. Regarding #3, what the First Nations are complaining about below is the same thing that the hunters and farmers are complaining about:
“Vice-chief Lyle Whitefish said the red tape involved for an individual registering a long gun -as well as the potential for a Criminal Code violation -has been an unreasonable burden on First Nations people trying to fulfill their treaty rights.”
“Part of our livelihood and sustenance is hunting and gathering and we are covered under the treaties for that,” he said. (http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/First+Nations+group+demands+long+registry+exemption/3577221/story.html#ixzz10YcMYDQk)
You can sit there and try to paint all gun owners as lazy, hillbilly, anti-government rednecks if you like, but it just shows that you have no clue as to what you’re talking about. The fringe element on the right which is the hillbillies using the “cold, dead hands” argument is just as looney as the fringe element on the left that is the unicorn-chasing, make-love-not-war peacenik crowd that thinks banning all guns would actually lower crime. Live in those fringes if you like, but it will do nothing to change the reality.
In reality, the registry is doing little to nothing in affecting crime from what I can see, so its purpose or application needs to be changed. Normal, everyday people can be treated like common criminals when the registry laws are over-zealously applied. That’s wrong, and should be changed also. If you guys have no point of reference for this, and what you all are saying is that the registry should exist as it stands merely on principle, then how can you argue that it is others who are being lazy or ignorant by wanting it changed?
Some food for thought:
http://www.cottagecountrynow.ca/opinion/letters/article/875067–criticism-for-national-gun-registry
http://www.fraserinstitute.org/publicationdisplay.aspx?id=13506&terms=gun+control
And for the record, I’m not a gun owner, but am getting ready to become one.
LikeLike
September 25, 2010 at 7:11 pm
Alan Scott
Vern R. Kaine,
I believe you have summarized the subject very well. I only take argument with. “The fringe element on the right which is the hillbillies using the “cold, dead hands” argument is just as looney as the fringe element on the left that is the unicorn-chasing, make-love-not-war peacenik crowd that thinks banning all guns would actually lower crime. ”
As a former city slicker who has lived with the hillbillies for 3 decades, there is nothing fringe or looney about them. There are a few loose cannons rolling around the deck from time to time, but certainly not to the degree of the unicorn chasers .
LikeLike
September 26, 2010 at 8:27 am
The Arbourist
Morning Vern, RL has been a little hectic as of late and I’ve been unable to get to the net as much as I would have liked. Your comment raises some good questions about the gun registry. Please be judicious when quoting the Fraiser Institute, they often put out reports that much to do with ideology as opposed to reality. :) I did read the abstract though.
1) it’s ridiculously overblown cost (which was grossly and deliberately lied about when it was proposed)
Lying is a part of politics, from both side of the spectrum, and unfortunately this bill was not any different. I would have to say that the cost is out of proportion to the benefits. Hopefully, parliament will get the opportunity to further refine and amend the bill so it becomes more cost effective and more fiscally sound.
2) the fact that criminals don’t register their guns
Absolutely. However, there do exist vulnerable populations in society that do benefit from the registry.
Find the whole document here.
So if this is helping the emergency room doctors and health care personnel I think that keep the registry is probably a good thing.
3) the treating of everyday people as criminals
Registering anything is a pain in the arse, but if the gun registry helps protect the vulnerable among us, a few bureaucratic hoops are worth it. It would be nice though if we could further streamline the process and make it easier to register and less expensive for the public to do so.
In reality, the registry is doing little to nothing in affecting crime from what I can see, so its purpose or application needs to be changed.
The registry is having an effect, but I would agree that the cost benefit ratio is out of whack.
LikeLike
September 26, 2010 at 5:13 pm
Vern R. Kaine
Mr. Scott,
The point I was trying to make there was that there are those who view the registry as an invasion of privacy, which even as a former farmboy I would have to disagree with. We need to register our vehicles, which when used improperly can be just as dangerous a weapon. Most of the “cold, dead hands” guys don’t seem to have a problem with that, so I find their position on being against the gun registry from that perspective to be a little wacky.
LikeLike