Distorting the gun facts
whitebread
rule by using taxpayer dollars to promote their agenda in ridings where they know the
Opposition politician there is bound to be more worried about retaining their seat in the
next election than standing up for a gun policy that reflects the majority of Candians.
I've spotted the cowards amongst the NDP and Liberal members who voted WITH the bloody
Cons to dismantle the long-arms registry. How about you?
_________________________
Distorting the gun facts
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/722449--distorting-the-gun-facts
November 08, 2009
Prime Minister Stephen Harper's law-and-order Conservatives have no valid reason to kill
off Canada's rifle and shotgun registry, beyond pandering to their rural constituencies.
So they've resorted to playing up the cost of the so-called "long gun" database and
denying its usefulness, trying to cast it in the worst possible light.
And sadly, with support from a handful of spineless New Democrats and Liberals, the Harper
government nudged forward a private member's bill in the Commons last week that would kill
the long gun registry and deprive police of a crime-fighting tool they find helpful.
The Conservatives are forever attacking the gun registry as a "billion-dollar-boondoggle."
And indeed, it did cost $1 billion to set up, due to cost overruns. But that is water
under the bridge.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police report that the registry for handguns and long guns cost
$8.4 million this past year to operate, hardly an onerous amount. Furthermore, the
registry could pay for itself, if the Conservatives had not decided to stop levying fees
for registering firearms. They have even waived the $60 to $80 fees to renew licences to
possess and acquire firearms. In the process, they have made the registry a burden on the
general public, the better to discredit it.
Meanwhile Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan is fond of saying things like, "It's clear
that the firearms registry is a giant waste of money and is totally useless in preventing
crime." But that isn't how the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police sees it. They
strongly support the registry, and argue, rightly, that Canada's 2 million gun owners
"need to be accountable" for their 7 million firearms.
The Mounties say that police consulted the registry some 3.5 million times last year, a
huge jump over the year before.
And Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair credits registration with helping his force recently
uncover a cache of 58 unregistered firearms including a machine gun and submachine gun
(both classified as "long guns"), 17 handguns, 35 rifles, four shotguns and thousands of
rounds of ammo. We can only imagine the result, if those weapons had found their way into
the hands of gang members and other criminals.
Blair calls the cost of the long-gun registry "money well spent." It makes life safer for
his officers, who know what they're up against when they respond to calls. And guns that
are duly registered to hunters, farmers and target shooters are also likelier to be
disarmed, carefully stored under lock and key, kept out of criminals' hands and not loaned
out to unlicensed people.
That makes life safer for us all. Scrapping the registry is a politically motivated move
with no policy rationale.
Pat Bay
"whitebread" <white...@shop.ca> wrote in message
news:YYFJm.4460$We2....@newsfe09.iad...
> No surprise that it's another 'distortion' coming from the Harper
> government. These guys rule by using taxpayer dollars to promote their
> agenda in ridings where they know the Opposition politician there is bound
> to be more worried about retaining their seat in the next election than
> standing up for a gun policy that reflects the majority of Candians.
>
> I've spotted the cowards amongst the NDP and Liberal members who voted
> WITH the bloody Cons to dismantle the long-arms registry. How about you?
Cost too much money to maintain.
Glad the thing was shot and killed.
P.S. I am a Conservative but not a gun nut like some idiots in this group.
Dave Smith
> No surprise that it's another 'distortion' coming from the Harper government. These guys
> rule by using taxpayer dollars to promote their agenda in ridings where they know the
> Opposition politician there is bound to be more worried about retaining their seat in the
> next election than standing up for a gun policy that reflects the majority of Candians.
>
> I've spotted the cowards amongst the NDP and Liberal members who voted WITH the bloody
> Cons to dismantle the long-arms registry. How about you?
> _________________________
>
> Distorting the gun facts
> http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/722449--distorting-the-gun-facts
> November 08, 2009
>
>
> Prime Minister Stephen Harper's law-and-order Conservatives have no valid reason to kill
> off Canada's rifle and shotgun registry, beyond pandering to their rural constituencies.
> So they've resorted to playing up the cost of the so-called "long gun" database and
> denying its usefulness, trying to cast it in the worst possible light.
>
> And sadly, with support from a handful of spineless New Democrats and Liberals, the Harper
> government nudged forward a private member's bill in the Commons last week that would kill
> the long gun registry and deprive police of a crime-fighting tool they find helpful.
>
> The Conservatives are forever attacking the gun registry as a "billion-dollar-boondoggle."
> And indeed, it did cost $1 billion to set up, due to cost overruns. But that is water
> under the bridge.
It may be water under the bridge, but it is money wasted on a system
that was unlikely to be of any use at all.
> The Royal Canadian Mounted Police report that the registry for handguns and long guns cost
> $8.4 million this past year to operate, hardly an onerous amount. Furthermore, the
> registry could pay for itself, if the Conservatives had not decided to stop levying fees
> for registering firearms. They have even waived the $60 to $80 fees to renew licences to
> possess and acquire firearms. In the process, they have made the registry a burden on the
> general public, the better to discredit it.
The RCMP have a vested interest in the gun registry. It is part of their
little empire. They have come under fire for a lot of things over the
last few years so they will use this one for all the PR they can get
from it.
> Meanwhile Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan is fond of saying things like, "It's clear
> that the firearms registry is a giant waste of money and is totally useless in preventing
> crime." But that isn't how the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police sees it. They
> strongly support the registry, and argue, rightly, that Canada's 2 million gun owners
> "need to be accountable" for their 7 million firearms.
Accountable for what? Long guns are not much of an issue when it comes
to crime. Eliminating the long gun registry will not eliminate the
handgun registry and gun owners will still have to have a licence. The
PAL makes owners accountable.
> The Mounties say that police consulted the registry some 3.5 million times last year, a
> huge jump over the year before.
And what benefit was there to 3.5 million hits? Every time a police
officer contacts CPIC for a check on a person it will generate a hit on
the registry.
> And Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair credits registration with helping his force recently
> uncover a cache of 58 unregistered firearms including a machine gun and submachine gun
> (both classified as "long guns"), 17 handguns, 35 rifles, four shotguns and thousands of
> rounds of ammo. We can only imagine the result, if those weapons had found their way into
> the hands of gang members and other criminals.
What a crock. I find it hard to believe that a registry of registered
weapons could help to uncover a cache of unregistered weapons. They
would not have been in the system. Long guns are shot guns and
rifles.... for target shooting and hunting. Machine guns and
submachine guns are prohibited weapons. They could not have been
registered because they are illegal. Even if the person who amassed that
illegal arsenal had a PAL, they could not have registered those guns.
The handguns should have been registered by a legitimate licence holder.
Those were 58 guns that would never have been registered anyway.
> Blair calls the cost of the long-gun registry "money well spent." It makes life safer for
> his officers, who know what they're up against when they respond to calls. And guns that
> are duly registered to hunters, farmers and target shooters are also likelier to be
> disarmed, carefully stored under lock and key, kept out of criminals' hands and not loaned
> out to unlicensed people.
It is hardly money well spent if the only data they can come up with to
justify it is the number of hits on it. They have not and cannot show
that the registry has prevented a single crime.
> That makes life safer for us all. Scrapping the registry is a politically motivated move
> with no policy rationale.
The registered guns never did pose much of a danger to anyone. The
problem has always been the guns that were smuggled and sold illegally,
or those that were stolen.
socialist that fear the truth but want to give up all their rights
government. These guys
> rule by using taxpayer dollars to promote their agenda in ridings where
they know the
> Opposition politician there is bound to be more worried about retaining
their seat in the
> next election than standing up for a gun policy that reflects the majority
of Candians.
For those that don't know him, Major General Peter Cosgrove is
an Australian.
General Cosgrove was interviewed on the radio recently.
Read his reply to the lady who interviewed him concerning guns
and children.
Regardless of how you feel about gun laws you have to love this!
This is one of the best comeback lines of all time.
In a portion of an ABC radio interview between a female
broadcaster and General Cosgrove who was about to sponsor a Boy Scout Troop
visiting his military Headquarters.
FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
So, General Cosgrove, what things are you going to teach these
young boys when they visit your base?
GENERAL COSGROVE:!
We're going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery and
shooting.
FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
Shooting! That's a bit irresponsible, isn't it?
GENERAL COSGROVE:
I don't see why, they'll be properly supervised on the rifle
range.
FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
Don't you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity to be
teaching children?
GENERAL COSGROVE:
I don't see how. We will be teaching them proper rifle
discipline before they even touch a firearm.
FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
But you're equipping them to become violent killers.
GENERAL COSGROVE:
Well, Ma'am, you're equipped to be a prostitute, but you're not
one, are you?
The radio went silent for 46 seconds and when it returned, this
interview was over.
What more needs to be said, all those who oppose guns are whores
.....................
socialist that fear the truth but want to give up all their rights
"Pat Bay" <pat...@islandz.net> wrote in message
news:6HGJm.51996$PH1.41058@edtnps82...
You are nothing more then an useful idiot Kent who really is a
"conservatarian"who wants free police.protection
Get a life you fucking kook!
klunk
"socialist that fear the truth but want to give up all their rights"
<.....Obama......the..saviour....@whitehouse,New.World.Order.UN.Global>
wrote in message news:15IJm.51156$Db2.13447@edtnps83...
hoooooleeee crap, gretel.... even when someone supports your position, you
not only shit all over them, you have the audacity to accuse them of not
having a life... for someone who has persistently posted reams of chicken
little crap on a daily basis for years on end, you really ARE entirely clued
out to the nature of your brand of insanity.... YOU are a textbook case that
we don't do enough as a society to help lost souls like you find their way
to a psychologically healthy lifestyle... you have my condolences... as well
as do those who must endure your insanity irl.... wow... you truly ARE
completely fucked up.... please... for your sake and for the sakes of those
who you may be fortunate to love and whom have tolerated your antics enough
to remain in your life.... get some help... please... %-(
Roy
> "socialist that fear the truth but want to give up all their rights"
> <.....Obama......the..saviour....@whitehouse,New.World.Order.UN.Global>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Pat Bay" <pat...@islandz.net> wrote in message
> >news:6HGJm.51996$PH1.41058@edtnps82...
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Mark is a stand-alone rebel who never had a cause worth espousing but
never let that little detail stand in his way.
==
socialist that fear the truth but want to give up all their rights
"Roy" <wil...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:de783933-8d3a-48e4...@b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
Roy, if you were not such a wennie and a dork, you would be an ok person....