Well, Bill C-391 didn't get shot down, though it should have been.
Out of the air in the House of Commons, just like the unfortunate virtual fowls in Super Mario Duck Hunt.
We guess that American vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin was around that day in the House of Commons, when the private members' bill, sponsored by Tory MP Candice Hoeppner from Manitoba, passed Nov. 4.
The bill in question? To kill the long-gun registry. For people who know nothing about firearms except for those in TV and movie shootouts, long guns are what hunters use to go after game. Bang, bang, critter, I feel like mooseburgers tonight.
Yes, many hunters shoot game not just for sport, but for food. We all know how delicious moose and caribou are; sometimes we go duck hunting; sealers use rifles - not clubs, PETA - to kill seals for food and pelts; occasionally hunters even use guns to fend off coyotes. Firearms are also a valuable tool in the arsenal of aboriginals who hunt game to feed families. And anyone who's come across a polar bear knows how ferocious that huge animal can be. If you don't have a rifle in hand and you encounter Ursus maritimus, start saying your prayers.
There's nothing wrong with hunting. Animals killed in the wild for eating expire quickly and hunters generally are humane about dispatching their prey. And isn't it better for the critter who roams freely in the wild than the miserable Angus bovine factory farmed in Alberta? Why do I need to register my rifle, asks the hunter.
But dangers from some animals and hunting for food shouldn't be the motivation to support a bill sponsored by the Sarah Palin of Canada's West.
The Liberals brought in the original registry in the wake of the Montreal Massacre, where a gunman gunned down 13 women 20 years ago.
Police associations don't like the move to scrap the registry. Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair says "the elimination of Canada's national firearms licensing and registration system for rifles and shotguns will make Canada less safe."
Police officers have every right to like a national registry. When they're responding to dangerous situations, they can find out if the persons involved have guns, and they have more of an idea of what they're up against.
Social workers, ditto. In many communities, they sometimes have to remove children from homes because of abuse or because parents and guardians are involved with criminal activities, and they may have firearms. Women's groups, whether they're anti-violence committees, transition house boards or other organizations, generally support the gun registry because they frequently deal with clients who flee abusive situations. Some of the clients have even been threatened with the partner's firearms. Polls show that two-thirds of Canadians support the registry.
A waste of money? Setting the thing up cost a lot to do it, but since then, the registry costs less than $9 million a year. An attack on rural lifestyles? Rural people use vehicles, but those machines have to be registered. Why not firearms? It's not an attack on rural lifestyles, but a tool against domestic homicides. When people are killed in those situations, firearms are the preferred tool that one partner uses to dispatch the other.
As for "the constituents want it," sorry, but that doesn't wash. We elected you guys and gals for your supposed common sense because some of your constituents don't have any.
"Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion," said 18th century British statesman Edmund Burke.
There are times that our politicians are allowed to think for themselves, and times when their constituents should come second.
We register cars, why not guns?
-
-
Published on
November 16, 2009
- Published on June 22, 2010
-
Sue Hickey
Well, Bill C-391 didn't get shot down, though it should have been.
Out of the air in the House of Commons, just like the unfortunate virtual fowls in Super Mario Duck Hunt.
We guess that American vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin was around that day in the House of Commons, when the private members' bill, sponsored by Tory MP Candice Hoeppner from Manitoba, passed Nov. 4.
- Rate
- Top of the page
Comments
-
- Dan
- - June 28, 2010 at 16:19:50
Sorry Sue but your arguments dont wash. All legal firearms owners must have a PAC so the cops can use that registry to see if there are guns present. Also there is no law requiring you to register your car. The mounties arent going to lock you up for storing it in your garage with no plates.
-
- Michelle
- - June 28, 2010 at 16:19:49
Chief Bill Blair should really remember what he says:
TORONTO POLICE CHIEF BILL BLAIR: Almost a quarter of people cops apprehend with guns are already prohibited from carrying firearms as a result of a previous conviction, Blair said. It's quite apparent that for those individuals those prohibitions have very little effect, Blair said.
Source: Toronto Sun Column: CHIEF'S TOUGH TALK NEEDS TOUGH ACTION, August 5, 2005, Page 7 -
- Bill
- - June 28, 2010 at 16:19:35
Sue has obviously not read the 'recent' polls. The only province that actually wants the registry is Quebec, but they want the rest of the country to continue paying for it. No thanks, I'll pass.. The RCMP (behind closed doors) don't want the registry either. They had a long gun registry in the 70's created by the old FAC system and they abandoned it. The registry exists for political reasons ONLY all of Canada were DUPED by the Liberals in the quest to look tougher on guns, than Kim Campbell was.. Read the link below, and educate yourself. The article in the link was written by someone working FOR gun control in Canada, and blows the lid off why 2 billion dollars was totally wasted on this farce.
This essay was originally published in the Globe and Mail under the title OFF TARGET
OFF TARGET
by Dr. John Dixon
Dr. John Dixon is a B.C. philosopher and hunter.
He served, through 1991 and 1992, as senior advisor to (then)
Deputy Minister of Justice, Mr. John Tait
It is no longer Available on the Globe website, but it has been posted elsewhere
http://www.rkba.ca/off_target.html -
- bob
- - June 28, 2010 at 16:19:31
Can we just seperate from the rest of canada...i am tired of easterns telling me whats good for me-go wild rose party...oh ya screw quebec. gotta go clean my guns
-
- Joe
- - June 28, 2010 at 16:19:26
Sue, you stated, We elected
you guys and gals for your supposed common sense because some of your
constituents don't have any. The Conservative Party, the guys and gals to whom you may refer, have neither owner licensing or firearm registration written within their party's firearms policy.
The constituents know that firearm licensing and registration schemes for law-abiding people do not reduce crime our improve public safety. The constituents know that criminals seldom license themselves or register their guns. The constituents know that no criminals may be legally included into this registry of innocent Canadians. The constituents know that firearm confiscation is the real reason for the unjust Firearms Act of 1995; and nothing more. Common sense tells you Sue, if you would listen, the Firearms Act must be totally abolished. -
- Roger
- - June 28, 2010 at 16:19:18
Once again, we have another writer leading potentially uninformed readers into a black hole of misinformation and emotionalism with very little attempt to adhere to the facts and realities of the subject.
Sue Hickey simply re-hashes already published information into her own questionable brand of mixed-information stew in the hopes that readers will enjoy yet another flavour of the month.
Facts speak louder than rhetoric; experience and knowledge add a trump card to both. Sue, your credibility would benefit greatly from some real world experience at a local gun club, or some level of direct knowledge of the subject matter before levelling an opinion.
It is akin to an individual, who has never owned or driven a vehicle, supporting the exclusivity of public transit.
As a qualifier, my wife and I own firearms and we safely enjoy the shooting sports as part of our Canadian heritage. Doing so does not make us criminals, or create a pre-cursor to violence necessitating a long-gun registry. -
- gerry
- - June 28, 2010 at 16:19:17
Well Sue, I normally love your articles but you missed the mark on this one.
If we have to register our guns, why not knives?
Why not baseball bats? Axes?
Criminals don't register guns. The logic for this registry is completely flawed. -
- Dan
- - June 22, 2010 at 17:35:25
Sorry Sue but your arguments dont wash. All legal firearms owners must have a PAC so the cops can use that registry to see if there are guns present. Also there is no law requiring you to register your car. The mounties arent going to lock you up for storing it in your garage with no plates.
-
- Michelle
- - June 22, 2010 at 17:35:24
Chief Bill Blair should really remember what he says:
TORONTO POLICE CHIEF BILL BLAIR: Almost a quarter of people cops apprehend with guns are already prohibited from carrying firearms as a result of a previous conviction, Blair said. It's quite apparent that for those individuals those prohibitions have very little effect, Blair said.
Source: Toronto Sun Column: CHIEF'S TOUGH TALK NEEDS TOUGH ACTION, August 5, 2005, Page 7 -
- Bill
- - June 22, 2010 at 17:35:01
Sue has obviously not read the 'recent' polls. The only province that actually wants the registry is Quebec, but they want the rest of the country to continue paying for it. No thanks, I'll pass.. The RCMP (behind closed doors) don't want the registry either. They had a long gun registry in the 70's created by the old FAC system and they abandoned it. The registry exists for political reasons ONLY all of Canada were DUPED by the Liberals in the quest to look tougher on guns, than Kim Campbell was.. Read the link below, and educate yourself. The article in the link was written by someone working FOR gun control in Canada, and blows the lid off why 2 billion dollars was totally wasted on this farce.
This essay was originally published in the Globe and Mail under the title OFF TARGET
OFF TARGET
by Dr. John Dixon
Dr. John Dixon is a B.C. philosopher and hunter.
He served, through 1991 and 1992, as senior advisor to (then)
Deputy Minister of Justice, Mr. John Tait
It is no longer Available on the Globe website, but it has been posted elsewhere
http://www.rkba.ca/off_target.html -
- bob
- - June 22, 2010 at 17:34:56
Can we just seperate from the rest of canada...i am tired of easterns telling me whats good for me-go wild rose party...oh ya screw quebec. gotta go clean my guns
-
- Joe
- - June 22, 2010 at 17:34:50
Sue, you stated, We elected
you guys and gals for your supposed common sense because some of your
constituents don't have any. The Conservative Party, the guys and gals to whom you may refer, have neither owner licensing or firearm registration written within their party's firearms policy.
The constituents know that firearm licensing and registration schemes for law-abiding people do not reduce crime our improve public safety. The constituents know that criminals seldom license themselves or register their guns. The constituents know that no criminals may be legally included into this registry of innocent Canadians. The constituents know that firearm confiscation is the real reason for the unjust Firearms Act of 1995; and nothing more. Common sense tells you Sue, if you would listen, the Firearms Act must be totally abolished. -
- Roger
- - June 22, 2010 at 17:34:41
Once again, we have another writer leading potentially uninformed readers into a black hole of misinformation and emotionalism with very little attempt to adhere to the facts and realities of the subject.
Sue Hickey simply re-hashes already published information into her own questionable brand of mixed-information stew in the hopes that readers will enjoy yet another flavour of the month.
Facts speak louder than rhetoric; experience and knowledge add a trump card to both. Sue, your credibility would benefit greatly from some real world experience at a local gun club, or some level of direct knowledge of the subject matter before levelling an opinion.
It is akin to an individual, who has never owned or driven a vehicle, supporting the exclusivity of public transit.
As a qualifier, my wife and I own firearms and we safely enjoy the shooting sports as part of our Canadian heritage. Doing so does not make us criminals, or create a pre-cursor to violence necessitating a long-gun registry. -
- gerry
- - June 22, 2010 at 17:34:40
Well Sue, I normally love your articles but you missed the mark on this one.
If we have to register our guns, why not knives?
Why not baseball bats? Axes?
Criminals don't register guns. The logic for this registry is completely flawed.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
