Long-gun registry bill back for debate by MPs


mentalfloss
#1
Long-gun registry bill back for debate by MPs

Bill C-19, is now at the report stage after being studied by the public safety committee. The committee finished its hearings on the controversial bill at the end of November but MPs haven't had the chance to deal with it since. The bill was sent back to the Commons with no amendments made to it by the committee.

The NDP had tried to make amendments — to maintain registration for some guns, such as sniper rifles — but they were shot down by Conservative MPs who hold a majority on the committee.

A range of witnesses appeared at the committee during the five meetings it spent on the bill, including representatives from hunting and sports shooting groups, legal and policy experts, police groups and gun-control advocates.

Opposition MPs were angry that the government is destroying the data, saying the records should remain intact for police or the provinces to use in the event they want to establish their own registry once the federal one is gone.

When the bill was first introduced in the fall the government moved a motion for time allocation, which limited the number of days of debate on it and it then moved on to committee.

The government could invoke time allocation again at this stage of the bill in order to get it to a final vote and into the Senate for its stamp of approval. Government House Leader Peter Van Loan has said he wants it passed by mid-February.

Long-gun registry bill back for debate by MPs - Politics - CBC News
 
Most helpful post: The members here have rated this post as best reply.
taxslave
+5
#2
Lets quit clowning around and get rid of this bad legislation. That is why we elected Harper in the first place.
 
L Gilbert
#3
That's it ..... shoot the bill down in flames.
 
mentalfloss
#4
Conservatives limit debate on long-gun registry
A Conservative backbench MP raised eyebrows Tuesday when he compared the long-gun registry to Nazi Germany.

OTTAWA The contentious long-gun registry is getting closer to its date with the firing squad.

Candice Hoeppner, parliamentary secretary to Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, said in a statement that the government is "one step closer to eliminating the wasteful and ineffective long-gun registry once and for all."

The Conservatives won a motion late Tuesday evening to limit debate on the long-gun registry repeal bill to one day at report stage and two days at the bill's third and final reading.

The time allocation motion to limit debate during the bill's report stage received 152 votes, with 131 MPs opposed. Bill C-19 will now be up for third reading. Afterwards, it will reach the Senate.

Last June, the Conservative government introduced a bill to end the requirement for gun owners to register their firearms which are not restricted or prohibited in Canada. The bill would also erase all Canadian Firearms Registry records.

"As you have heard, members on the Government side say time and time again the long-gun registry was a $2-billion boondoggle created by the previous Liberal government and it has wrongfully targeted farmers, ranchers, hunters, trappers and sports shooters who have broken no laws," Hoeppner said in statement.

The registry is ineffective, she said, because of "faulty" logic.

"We know that criminals do not register their guns," Hoeppner said.

Meanwhile, an issue related to the bill was causing online buzz, a few hours before the vote.

A Conservative MP compared the long-gun registry to Hitler and the Nazis in the House of Commons. Opposition MPs were quick to pounce on the comments, saying they were aimed at muzzling debate about the program, which has pitted some rural and urban voters against each other.

Interim Liberal leader Bob Rae said Ontario MP Larry Miller's comments were part of a "prepared speech" and accused the Harper government of shutting down discussion on the controversial plan to scrap the registry.

Miller, an MP for Bruce Grey-Owen Sound, did a fast retreat Tuesday over the comments he made in the House of Commons Tuesday afternoon, withdrawing the statements after question period.

Miller, an opponent of the registry, opened his statement on the registry by quoting former Liberal justice minister Allan Rock as saying, "I came to Ottawa last year with the firm belief that the only people in Canada who should have firearms are police officers and the military."

"Sound familiar?" Miller asked. "Adolf Hitler. 1939," he said.

Miller also quoted former Liberal senator Sharon Carstairs as saying that "the registering of hunting rifles is the first step in the social re-engineering of Canadians."

"Mr. Speaker, can you believe that statement? The social engineering of Canadians. Mr. Speaker, that is what Adolf Hitler tried to do in the 1930s," he claimed, over a chorus of catcalls in the Commons.

"The long-gun registry is at its core solely about an idea that the Liberals had that guns are inherently evil and must be taken out the hands of the general population. Again, who does that sound like?" Miller said.

Rae and other MPs took offence at Miller's use of Hitler's name. Invoking Hitler, Rae alleged, "is to use a word of violence, of hate."

"How could the debate go this far that someone would think that this is an acceptable way to carry on this discussion?" he said after question period. "That the women who are in favour of controlling arms for a variety of reasons the majority of Canadians' public opinion who support it. That they're somehow comparable to Adolf Hitler."

"The sense of triumphalism which they've had in the House on this question," Rae said. "They have a complete lack of understanding, a complete lack of sensitivity to how a great great many Canadians feel about violence."

Official Opposition justice critic Jack Harris said he found the comparison "obviously disgusting" and "clearly unparliamentary."

The NDP MP said the Conservatives are out of touch with the concerns of "a parade of victims of gun violence" who spoke at a parliamentary committee supporting the registry.

Calls to Miller's office were not returned.

Meanwhile, some took to Twitter to voice their outrage over Miller's comparison, including Quebec Liberal MP Justin Trudeau who doubted the sincerity of Miller's apology.

"Weak and insincere apology by Larry Miller. It sounded like he apologized to Hitler for using his name," Trudeau tweeted. He said Miller's comments were directly targeting the Liberal Party: "Larry Miller, CPC, just twice compared the Liberals to Hitler on the (long-gun registry). Sorry Larry, first one to bring up Hitler in a debate loses," he wrote.

Conservatives limit debate on long-gun registry (external - login to view)
 
taxslave
+1
#5
Nice to know that the Conservatives are standing up for the rights of citizens against a tide of socialists that do not believe in rights or personal property.
Aside from that there is little need for more debate. No minds are going to be changed by a bunch of wind bags blathering at great expense to taxpayers. The long gun registry is dead. Lets move on to important issues.
 
mentalfloss
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Nice to know that the Conservatives are standing up for the rights of citizens against a tide of socialists that do not believe in rights or personal property.

I wouldn't paint this as black and white as some Conservatives actually voted against the time allocation motion.
 
Colpy
+8
#7  Top Rated Post
The thing has been debated for SIXTEEN YEARS. Everyone concerned knows what the story is, and understands what the bill is intended to do........and that is "dismantle the long gun registry".

the promise to "dismantle the LGR" has been a plank in the Conservative platform since the thing came into existence. The conservatives were elected with a majority. Everybody knew this thing was dead.

Fer God's sake, put it out of our misery, now!
 
mentalfloss
+1
#8
Finally.

Colpy is back from the grave.

Good to see you again buddy.


You actually managed to half-way convince me that I don't really care.. or at least, we should experiment with the freedom to bear arms and see where it gets us.
 
Colpy
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Finally.

Colpy is back from the grave.

Good to see you again buddy.


You actually managed to half-way convince me that I don't really care.. or at least, we should experiment with the freedom to bear arms and see where it gets us.

Honestly, I thing the length and acrimony of the debate convinced practically EVERYBODY not directly involved that they don't give a rat's **** one way or another, as long as we all STFU!!!!!

lol

Nice to be back, and thank you.
 
mentalfloss
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

Honestly, I thing the length and acrimony of the debate convinced practically EVERYBODY not directly involved that they don't give a rat's **** one way or another, as long as we all STFU!!!!!

lol

Nice to be back, and thank you.

No problem.

Here's an honest question for you.. Let's assume there is a causal link - a proven causal link mind you - which would show that the freedom granted to Canadian citizens from removing this registry was leading to a marked increase in violence.

Would you think that it would be worth giving up this freedom in favour of the general welfare of Canadians?
 
Colpy
+2
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

No problem.

Here's an honest question for you.. Let's assume there is a causal link - a proven causal link mind you - which would show that the freedom granted to Canadian citizens from removing this registry was leading to a marked increase in violence.

Would you think that it would be worth giving up this freedom in favour of the general welfare of Canadians?

My original message was too short, so I had to include this line to make it work...

Original message below:

No.

Quote:

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both...........Benjamin Franklin.

 
Durry
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Nice to know that the Conservatives are standing up for the rights of citizens against a tide of socialists that do not believe in rights or personal property.
Aside from that there is little need for more debate. No minds are going to be changed by a bunch of wind bags blathering at great expense to taxpayers. The long gun registry is dead. Lets move on to important issues.

Some people just can't seem to move on no matter what !!! Go figure !! Losers, I'd say !!
 
Spade
#13
Yah, let's debate the use of info gained through torture. Is that why we voted for Harper?
 
mentalfloss
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

No.

I see your point, but in this assumption, let's say you're giving up a little liberty for a lot of security. Remember, I'm not implying that there is a causal link between the two, but just, hypothetically if over time this turned out to be true for Canada.

Would you still willing to hold on to that liberty?
 
L Gilbert
+2
#15
"The trade-off between freedom and security, so often proposed so seductively, very often leads to the loss of both." - Christopher Hitchens

"The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes." - Thomas Paine

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams

"But you must remember, my fellow-citizens, that eternal vigilance by the people is the price of liberty, and that you must pay the price if you wish to secure the blessing. It behooves you, therefore, to be watchful in your States as well as in the Federal Government." - Andrew Jackson

Feel free to be vigilant and vigilant to keep freedom, but keep both under control. IOW, don't punish an entire people because of the deeds of a few.
 
bobnoorduyn
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

"The trade-off between freedom and security, so often proposed so seductively, very often leads to the loss of both." - Christopher Hitchens

I am surprised such a virulent atheist would be such an advocate of individual liberty, (I do agree that he was a very good columnist even if I didn't agree with all his views). Aside from that, his statement is a paraphrased Quote originally attributed to Benjamin Franklin, "Those who would sacrifice liberty for freedom deserve neither", but I've also seen it attributed to others of the same era as well, I just can't remember who.
 
L Gilbert
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by bobnoorduynView Post

I am surprised such a virulent atheist would be such an advocate of individual liberty,

Why? I'm atheist and fairly libertarian.
Quote:

(I do agree that he was a very good columnist even if I didn't agree with all his views).

Yep. me, too.
Quote:

Aside from that, his statement is a paraphrased Quote originally attributed to Benjamin Franklin, "Those who would sacrifice liberty for freedom deserve neither", but I've also seen it attributed to others of the same era as well, I just can't remember who.

Yes, it is and it was Ben Franklin. Others may have also paraphrased it.
 
taxslave
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

No problem.

Here's an honest question for you.. Let's assume there is a causal link - a proven causal link mind you - which would show that the freedom granted to Canadian citizens from removing this registry was leading to a marked increase in violence.

Would you think that it would be worth giving up this freedom in favour of the general welfare of Canadians?

I would have to say no for a couple of reasons.First I am not necessarily against a registry provided it is done in a sane and useful manner. This one was neither. Next all criminals would have to register their automatic handguns first. Next there would have to be a guarantee like a clause in the charter of rights that some government down the road could never change the ownership rules and steal our rifles like the Liberals did with previously legal and registered automatic rifles.
 
Machjo
#19
Long gun data loss will hurt investigations, RCMP says - Montreal - CBC News

I'm starting to lean more in favour of the long-gun registry. It seems to have served a useful purpose after all.

That said, it would be foolhardy for any party to make it a central part of their platform for the next mandate.
 
Niflmir
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

Long gun data loss will hurt investigations, RCMP says - Montreal - CBC News

I'm starting to lean more in favour of the long-gun registry. It seems to have served a useful purpose after all.

That said, it would be foolhardy for any party to make it a central part of their platform for the next mandate.

It can definitely aid in investigations. If you find someone possessing a stolen gun, then you can immediately convict them of 2 crimes: possession of stolen property and possession of an unregistered firearm. It is a few short steps from there to finding the actual robbers (if the person in possession didn't commit the theft in the first place).

Too bad for the police that they used the registry instead to harass people that did not commit any crimes.

The police should need a warrant to access any sort of database like this. It would maintain its utility, and wouldn't have any impact on citizens.
 
taxslave
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by NiflmirView Post

It can definitely aid in investigations. If you find someone possessing a stolen gun, then you can immediately convict them of 2 crimes: possession of stolen property and possession of an unregistered firearm. It is a few short steps from there to finding the actual robbers (if the person in possession didn't commit the theft in the first place).

Too bad for the police that they used the registry instead to harass people that did not commit any crimes.

The police should need a warrant to access any sort of database like this. It would maintain its utility, and wouldn't have any impact on citizens.

That would be at least 3 crimes. The person that the rifle is registered to would be charged for unsafe storage and possibly as a result be held liable for for any crimes committed with it. Then again other than poaching there are not many crimes committed with a rifle anyway so there is no point to registering them, especially when they can't even control all the handguns that ARE used on a daily basis to commit crimes and have had registration since the mid 30s.
BTW sniper rifles are prohibited weapons so the NDP amendment would be useless. Like the NDP
 
Dixie Cup
+1
#22
From what has been reported over the last few years, it seems the cops on the beat and patroling our streets do not see the advantage of having the registry - it's the higher up's that, likely for political reasons, say that the registry is needed. Any one who has been a "regular" on the force that I've heard speak to the issue, have said that it's not realiable and is ripe with errors and the cops don't rely on it in any event so what is the purpose of it?

BTW, no one has provided any proof, (although many people have asked for it) that the registry prevented any crimes. At least, I'm still waiting for it - has anyone else seen or heard of proof??? Just askin'

JMO
 
lone wolf
#23
...from my cold, dead hands....
 
JamesBondo
#24
that is actually a pretty inspiring speech delivered from Charlton Heston, but the anti-gun crowd likes to clip the closing statement and present it out of context.
 

Similar Threads

340
Long Gun Registry -Yes- No
by Goober | Dec 22nd, 2010
92
RCMP's report on the long-gun registry
by Liberalman | Oct 24th, 2010
43
Death of Long Gun Registry
by Durgan | Dec 23rd, 2007
no new posts