Ten Paces then DRAW!

[peapod]

We do not need to defend ourselves, this is typical of this gerry springer crowd, when all else fails, go for the trailer park trash. You have been told repeatedly if you have a problem with a moderator contact andem, yet you insist on trying to bring it in to open fourm, where you whine like a big baby. You have also been told that there is no need for a bunch of threads on the same topic.
Now quit whining and actually refute people around here with actual facts, instead of whining and chanting commie, is that all you got, so far its all we have seen. Are you actually going to offer something up around here, or are you just going to brag and boast.

 

[Reverend Blair]

and we think that the Liberals are insane when it come to the gun registry, can you imagine what the NDP would do if they ever got into power (not that they ever will)........ these idiots would probably require us to store guns at the local police station

Perhaps you should check the NDP policy on that before you start wiggling your fingers over the keyboard, Hank. You've just shown that you have no idea what the policy is or anything about the NDP. Again.

 

[Hank C Cheyenne]

Federal government willing to toughen gun laws to fight urban crime
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WHITEHORSE (CP) - Federal Justice Minister Irwin Cotler says he's ready to bring in tougher sentencing for gun crimes if he can get agreement from his provincial and territorial counterparts this week.

"We have to send a strong message with respect to those who would wish to engage in gun-related crime," Cotler said in an interview Monday. "There will be legislative initiatives in that regard . . . . If there is a consensus after I share this with my colleagues, I will be able to move rather quickly."

Cotler said he will outline his proposals over the next two days to his provincial and territorial ministers at a meeting in the Yukon capital.

Included will be measures to strengthen the current mandatory minimum sentences that already apply to some gun offences.

But Cotler said he'd like the sentencing reforms to be part of a wider "tri-partite package" that would also feature steps to ensure more effective law enforcement and greater community involvement in crime-prevention programs.

His comments came after a public appeal by Michael Bryant, the Ontario attorney general, for a "zero tolerance" policy on gun crime.

Nowhere in Canada is the threat of gun violence more prevalent than in Toronto, where 44 lives have been lost to gunplay already this year, Bryant said.

"I think the justice ministers all recognize the serious danger that's taking place here (in Toronto).

"Nobody wants gun crime to move into their province, and by toughening up our gun laws, this will make sure there's nowhere for the gun criminals to go."

Cotler said he's heard the same message from other ministers, including Manitoba's Gordon Mackintosh and Nova Scotia's Michael Baker.

The federal minister refused to go into detail about the legislative changes he has in mind until he formally presents them to the Whitehorse conference.

Bryant has submitted a 15-page brief to the ministers gathered in Whitehorse, calling for stronger sentences and "significant" jail time for anyone who uses a gun to commit a crime.

"If we don't send that message, then we're not providing the appropriate deterrent and punishment for an ever increasing scourge upon our streets in Ontario," he said.

That conference agenda also includes discussions on aboriginal justice, legal aid, domestic violence, organized crime and the drug trade, among other items.

Ontario is seeking to extend mandatory minimum sentences to some offences where they do not currently exist - such as unauthorized possession of a firearm in a motor vehicle, in order to combat drive-by shootings and incidents related to road rage.

Bryant also wants to increase the minimums that do exist, for example in the areas of illegally importing and selling weapons.


Those who participate in the illicit gun trade "are simply not facing the kind of deterrent that I think most Canadians would expect them to face," he said.

The Criminal Code currently provides minimum additional sentences of four years for using firearms to commit certain serious offences, such as attempted murder, aggravated sexual assault, kidnapping, hostage-taking, robbery and extortion.

For many other offences, however, including importing, trafficking and simple possession of an unlawful firearm, the mandatory minimum is only one year.

©The Canadian Press, 2005

 

[Hank C Cheyenne]

I actually think this is a good idea...tougher sentencing for people who use firearms in crime is a step towards the right direction...... if we just let these people off then there is no deterrent......we should allocate money for more policing which would also help....the only thing that worries me is that the liberals will attempt in the process to make it harder to purchase firearms.....it seems they want to make it a headache to get firearms so that people will just say f**k it, I don't care.....and this is a shame because responible gun ownership should be urged...not attacked

 

[Hank C Cheyenne]

Perhaps you should check the NDP policy on that before you start wiggling your fingers over the keyboard, Hank. You've just shown that you have no idea what the policy is or anything about the NDP. Again.

...so where does the NDP stand on gun ownership and the gun registry program?

 

[Colpy]

Cosmo

I understand that a belief in fundamental individual rights can extend all the way to the left of the political spectrum.

Thirty years ago, I was already a gun-totin dude, distrustful of government. I was also, believe it or not, an NDP voter.

I veered right when I realized the left was a threat to personal freedom.

I like to joke that I grew old enough that my brain stem became fully attached.

Wasn't it Churchill that said something like.....If you are not a communist at 16, you have no heart. If you are not a conservative at 40, you have no brain.

In the same vein, I am constantly amazed at the narrow-mindedness of the supporters of the left in this forum. Some, admittedly, are at least polite. Most love to refer to anyone not an NDP voter as "racist" "redneck" "ignorant" or worse. My how tolerant of them!

I find much of the left extremely tolerant of all kinds of people.........as long as they agree with them.

Cosmo, you seem to be an exception.

Perhaps there is hope for you yet.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Why not go back to when the Firearms Registration program was first being introduced and follow the history of it through. They were more effective at getting concerns addressed than the Reform/Alliance/Conservatives have been, yet all I hear from the right is misrepresentation and bluster. I'm bloody tired of it.

What the Conservatives are too dim to understand is that this is not a left/right issue at all, it is an urban/rural issue. There aren't a lot of natives who vote for the Conservatives, after all, and there are a lot of hunters who live in small towns and rural areas and vote NDP or Liberal.

 

[Hank C Cheyenne]

What the Conservatives are too dim to understand is that this is not a left/right issue at all, it is an urban/rural issue

....I know it is a urban vs rural issue.....the people in Ottawa are obsessed with gun control and will push for tougher international gun control laws just so it is acceptable for Canada to tighten up its laws.....sorry but I have not been able to find the NDP stance on gun control and the gun registry......I have heard many times from the Conservatives that they will immediately scrap the program and allocate moneys to law enforcement......actually I believe it is on their website.....

...but I still insist it is somewhat a left vs right issue.....when I talk to people of all political stripes....and I have talked to a boatload of people since I have moved to Canada...it seems the people on the left are more for the gun registry even though they cannot prove it is effective.... and the people on the right are the first to defend gun ownership even if they do not own firearms.... I cannot find the NDP stance on gun registry on it website though...do you have a link Rev..to prove your point?

 

[Reverend Blair]

See, you haven't done your homework. I know that I've explained this on this very site several times. There are so many threads on gun control around here it'll make your head spin. I've run through the entire situation from the beginning. I've pointed out exactly how the Reform/Alliance/Conservatives blew any effective oppostion to the plan.

You likely won't believe, and certainly won't like, what I have to say on this issue, Hank. If you want to know the NDP's involvement in it, why not go to Hansard and read what was said in the House of Commons and in committee. It'll all be there.

That would make far more sense than coming on here and making statements like,

and we think that the Liberals are insane when it come to the gun registry, can you imagine what the NDP would do if they ever got into power (not that they ever will)........ these idiots would probably require us to store guns at the local police station.

 

[Colpy]

The NDP have sidestepped the issue to a certain extent.

They really do love the residual support they still hold in rural areas of the west, where the CCF first came into being.

Unfortunately, the NDP is now a tool of urban intellectuals.

If the NDP are elected, you can kiss your guns good-bye.

Just ask Jack. When he was involved in civic politics, he was all for turning Toronto into a "gun-free" zone.

 

[Colpy]

Rev, you are so full of it.

I actually sat and watched the committee hearings on C-68. Witness after witness told the committee members that individual identification of each firearm would be difficult if not impossible, that by extrapolating the cost of the old handgun registry, a long gun registry could cost over a billion dollars, that gun owners would never fully comply, that gun crime would not drop.

These witnesses were ridiculed.

They were also correct on every point.

To say Garry Breitkreuz has been ineffective is to be completely obtuse.

 

[Hank C Cheyenne]

If you want to know the NDP's involvement in it, why not go to Hansard and read what was said in the House of Commons and in committee.

...the thing is I would like to know currently where the NDP stands on the issue....they seem to be very unclear on this issue.... and if I was a betting man I would put my money that the NDP support stricter laws..... it is logial Rev to beleive this......I don't need to go back and read what the NDP said when this registry was passed...also things have changed since then...the registry was not supposed to be this costly and ineffective....I want to know where this party stand on the issue TODAY....

The NDP have sidestepped the issue to a certain extent.

They really do love the residual support they still hold in rural areas of the west, where the CCF first came into being.

...I would agree with you Colpy

Just ask Jack. When he was involved in civic politics, he was all for turning Toronto into a "gun-free" zone.

8O ...why I can never understand why these people would like to take the guns away from law abiding citizens.

 

[Reverend Blair]

I never said a fecking thing about witnesses in committee, although you are misrepresenting what went on in an attempt to support your side of the story. We all have CPAC, Colpy.

the thing is I would like to know currently where the NDP stands on the issue

About half are for it and half against. The party is split down the middle so, being a democratic party, the members just vote their conscience. I've said that on here before and I thought you might at least take the time to look it up, but I guess that shouldn't have gotten my hopes up.

Since we have to rehash the whole thing again....

The Liberals were in a position were they had to do something. There were cries for a all sorts of controls after l'ecole polytechnique masscre. The Liberals are an urban part, mostly from the east, and didn't have a clue about guns. They came up with registration program. The Bloq backed them fully on it. So you had the Liberals with a large majority and a large opposition party going for this legislation.

The Reform/Alliance/Conservatives went into a tizzy. They basically got their platform from the NRA. Chuck Heston came up and told us all how we had rights under the Second Amendment of the US constitution. Ted Nugent insisted that he should be able to kill bears at will using whatever weapon he deemed appropriate.

The Reform/Alliance/Conservatives looked like what they are...a bunch of clueless rednecked American wannbes. They treated the whole thing as a zero sum win-loss game and they lost. Badly.

They've done nothing but whine like babies ever since and have not worked with other parties, even though there is a minority government, to change the parts of the law they find most offensive.

The NDP quitely opposed parts of the bill and offered amendments to take into account native culture, the realities of living in the North, and the fact that small-town museums would be under severe hardship. They got some positive changes made there.

The fact is that the majority of Canadian people support gun registration. The non-stop bitching by the Conservatives about this issue costs them votes in every election. If they were to come up with a reasonable alternative that would likely change, but they are so locked into the Republican pro-gun rhetoric that they cannot see that.

 

[Colpy]

What a pile!

The Liberals were under NO pressure to introduce a new regimen of gun laws. The outcry for action had been answered by the PCs, with Kim Campbell's bill C-17 of 1992.

Liberal action was taken largely at the urging of Alan Rock, who came to Parliament firmly believing that nobody except the police and military should have guns, and was promptly given the Justice portfolio.. Rock was then a wonderboy of the new Liberal gov't. The Liberals were new in power, and feeling their oats.
They were also, as you say, urban in nature and enjoying the full support of the Bloc on this issue. Liberals are always up for selling the country down the river for Quebec.

So they introduced, and forced through, Bill C-68 with NO significant changes or revisions forced by anyone. Note I said SIGNIFICANT.

This bill is so flawed, so inherently wrong, such a disaster, that it needs to be thrown out entirely. Reform recognized that, and worked against it.

The PCs waffled, and came out against the long gun registry.

The NDP wrung its hands, split along rural/urban lines.

C-68 became (very bad) law.

 

[Colpy]

Oh yeah

By the way.....Bill C-68 has been SUCH a fiasco that polls over the last couple of years show that most Canadians want it scrapped.

Both national newspapers (out of T.O., no less) consistently support the scrapping of the long gun registry.

Parliament, at one point refused to vote funding for the registry.

The only things that keep it alive are the Liberals' fears of loosing a vote in Quebec, and their arrogant inability to admit a mistake.

 

[Reverend Blair]

It's not a pile at all, Colpy. Campbell's bill was considered to be to little too late, an attempt to be seen doing something.

You may not think the changes to C-68 are significant, but then the Reform/Alliance/Conservatives don't exactly have a long history of considering native issues except for when it's time to cut programs.

You guys did a crappy job representing your constituents and lost. You refuse to work with anybody on anything. Now go cry in your weak American beer.

 

[Colpy]

A reasonable alternative?

The Practical Gun Control System.

Dump registration completely.

Allow the recreational firearms community to train potential firearms owners in the safe handling of firearms. Allow for different levels of training, from simple safety and responsibility with hunting long guns, right up to personal defense courses.

After all, the recreational firearms community are the ones who will be hunting in the same woods, or standing on the firing line next to the people they qualify. They have a stake in making sure they are well trained.

When a person has satisfied an instructor that he is qualified at a certain level, that instructor certifies him and sends him off to the local police, who do a CPIC check and a security investigation. If the subject passes, he is issued a licence specifying exactly what type of arm he can possess, and all conditions of carriage, etc.

If the police stop a guy with a gun and proper licence....OK.

If the police stop a guy with a gun and no licence.....go to jail. Go directly to jail.

Simple, ain't it?

 

[Reverend Blair]

After all, the recreational firearms community are the ones who will be hunting in the same woods,

They aren't the only ones and I sure as hell don't want something as vague as "the recreational firearms" community training people who have guns when I go out armed with a Nikon.

The idea of dumping registration is not going to sell in most of Canada. You can forget that idea now...it will lose you any election you try to run in. Besides, what the hell is wrong with registering a gun? You register your car.

I keep hearing about all the hoops you have to jump through. Sorry, seen the form, know the questions, know what it takes to be registered. No hoops, just a straight forward process that a child in desperate need of Ritalin could manage.

When you say you'd dump registration completely, do you mean handguns too? Those should be banned completely. They serve no legitimate purpose. Don't even tell me that you need one to protect your home, because that's been shown to be stupid seven ways from sundown. Firearms kept for that purpose have more chance of killing a family member than an intruder.

 

[Colpy]

Okay.

Who do you think trains and qualifies people for licences now? Guess what. It is done by volunteers from the "recreational firearms community". I was an instructor myself.

Did you miss my above post? The majority of Canadians want the long gun registry dumped. I admit that advocating dumping the old handgun registry would be political foolishness, but I never claimed to be mainstream.

True, registering is not difficult. It is useless, inaccurate, and expensive to the government.

You are telling a man who carries a handgun everyday for protection that they have no legitimate use. Funny, I lug around millions of dollars and nobody tries to rob me. I wonder why? Can't be that useless sidearm, eh?

Research in the United States has shown firearms use for self-defense to be beneficial in the extreme. Firearms (mostly handguns) in the US are used as many as two million times a year by private citizens or self defense. In the vast majority of these cases, no shots are fired. The display of a weapon is enough.

In 1988 Florida adopted a "shall issue" concealed handgun permit system. In other words, state authorities were required to issue a licence to carry a concealed pistol to any citizen that had taken a safe handling course, and had no criminal record.

Detractors predicted bloodshed in the streets.

Guess what? The violent crime rate in Florida nose-dived. The law was so simple, so effective that now 34 states have their own "shall issue" laws.

Meanwhile violent crime rates in the US have dropped dramatically. Mind you, I do NOT claim that "shall issue" laws are completely responsible for that, or even a major factor. But they certainly haven't hurt.

The idea that a handgun kept in the home is (let me quote it) "43 times more likely to kill a friend or family member" than an intruder is patently false. It is based on "research" done by a Dr. Kellerman for the American (anti-gun) Center for Disease Control.

Kellerman radically doctored his research and lost his funding from the CDC because he was so easily debunked. He, and his research have been completely discredited. Which hasn't stopped the anti-gun folks from quoting him so much that his lies have become conventional wisdom.

Just for starters, the vast majority (well over 90%) of defensive use of a firearms do NOT involve the gun being fired. When a firearm is used for defense, a criminal is killed in only 0.1 to 0.2 percent of the time.

Google Arthur Kellerman, Gary Kleck, or John Lott if you are interested in the research.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Just as I thought, you are one of those arm everybody guys. Look at the gun-crime rate in the US. Look at the accidental shootings. Don't try to spin the numbers and don't listen to the NRA, just look at the numbers. Now look at any other OECD country. Now tell me again that their system works. See? You lose.

The US is eigth in gun murders per year...right up there with Costa Rica and Uruguay. Canada, with our probelem with illegal guns spilling over the border from the US and the negative influence of US gun nut and media, is 20th in gun murders. We have Switzerland and Germany around us on the list. Those numbers are per capita, as such numbers always are, so you can forget saying that the US is ten times our size too.

Obviously we are doing something right. The Conservative push to allow more handguns is a push to increase crime because of their cowboy fantasies.