I believe the DNA Databank has saved lives and prevented abuses. I believe the long gun registry has done the same. If I am wrong about the later, duck hunters and farmer will have to fill out some forms (which I admit is a incovenient). If the Tories are wrong, some families will be filling out death certificates.
Monday, November 28, 2011
Also worth reading
Long time crime victims' advocate Steve Sullivan writes about the long gun registry.
Sunday, November 27, 2011
So what exactly is a sniper rifle?
When bloggers write about the wrong headed Harper Tory plan to repeal the life saving long gun, self annointed gun language cops leap on any perceived diversion from their world view.
For whatever reason, they seem especially put out by the use of the term sniper rifle.
There must be a simple way to solve this obvious disconnect.
How would a gun dealer define a sniper rifle?
The Shooting Edge, one of Calgary's leading firearms dealers, lists the non-restricted, Czech-made CZ 750 Sniper on its website.
This reputable gun shop highlights the rifle's effective range of just under half a mile and the fact that it was designed for "use by the elite military and law enforcement snipers".
It's not a duck gun. Nevertheless, the CZ 750 Sniper will no longer be listed if the Harper government's gun registry repeal bill passes.
It means that police will no longer know who has access to a firearm with an effective range of almost half a mile.
It means that the seller of a sniper rifle like this one will only need to believe that the buyer his licenced. It's a faith based transaction. Sellers won't have to confirm that the buyer's licence card is actually valid.
It means that misplaced faith and handshake will be all the law requires to purchase a weapon designed for "use by the elite military and law enforcement snipers".
For whatever reason, they seem especially put out by the use of the term sniper rifle.
There must be a simple way to solve this obvious disconnect.
How would a gun dealer define a sniper rifle?
This reputable gun shop highlights the rifle's effective range of just under half a mile and the fact that it was designed for "use by the elite military and law enforcement snipers".
It's not a duck gun. Nevertheless, the CZ 750 Sniper will no longer be listed if the Harper government's gun registry repeal bill passes.
It means that police will no longer know who has access to a firearm with an effective range of almost half a mile.
It means that the seller of a sniper rifle like this one will only need to believe that the buyer his licenced. It's a faith based transaction. Sellers won't have to confirm that the buyer's licence card is actually valid.
It means that misplaced faith and handshake will be all the law requires to purchase a weapon designed for "use by the elite military and law enforcement snipers".
Saturday, November 26, 2011
The Mulroneyesque Thomas Mulcair
There are many things that we could say about Brian Mulroney.
Many of them are bad. But he did have the gift of blarney.
At his best, Mulroney could charm a snake charmer out of his cobras and then go on to convince his opponents that cobras were a thoughtful gift.
But that gift came with a burden.
Canadians became convinced that Mulroney's blarney was BS. They knew that Mulroney would say one thing to one audience and another on another day in another part of Canada.
Turns out that Thomas Mulcair suffers from the same affliction.
In Ottawa, Mulcair supports the life saving gun registry:
Destroying lives is irritating.
Politicians changing their "principles" to pander to their audience is irritating.
Don't worry Thomas, Brian Mulroney will understand.
Even if vulnerable women and kids don't.
Many of them are bad. But he did have the gift of blarney.
At his best, Mulroney could charm a snake charmer out of his cobras and then go on to convince his opponents that cobras were a thoughtful gift.
But that gift came with a burden.
Canadians became convinced that Mulroney's blarney was BS. They knew that Mulroney would say one thing to one audience and another on another day in another part of Canada.
Turns out that Thomas Mulcair suffers from the same affliction.
In Ottawa, Mulcair supports the life saving gun registry:
"I know, as does Mr. Layton, that to destroy the gun registry is to destroy lives, so we don't need to be convinced on this"In Thunder Bay, he's not so direct.
Destroying lives is irritating.
Politicians changing their "principles" to pander to their audience is irritating.
Don't worry Thomas, Brian Mulroney will understand.
Even if vulnerable women and kids don't.
Fixing the Liberal Party is not rooted in PTAs
James Morton has blogged about his discussion with a Saskatchewan Liberal.
His interlocutor seems to think that the solution to Western alienation is to retain the Liberal Party's provincial and territorial associations.
Respectfully, we disagree.
Outside of British Columbia, the record of the provincial associations In Western Canada, on a hit or miss scale, is mostly miss.
Provincial association conventions seem to mainly serve to elect connected insiders to ex-officio positions on the national executive. During the Martin-Chretien leadership conflict, those elections served only to further divide Liberals.
Among the small number of self-identified Liberals in Western Canada, processes that inherently divide do not serve to strengthen the party.
Other than sometimes issuing membership cards on time, it's hard to imagine what role prairie west provincial associations actually had. With centralized membership, even that role is redundant.
The last time anybody spent serious effort organizing the federal Liberal Party outside of major city Laurier Club meetings was in the lead up to the 1990 leadership convention.
In 1990, it wasn't the efforts of provincial associations that built the party but those of leadership campaigns and their supporters.
There is simply no evidence that any of the provincial associations have a plan or the resources to actually build the party in their provinces.
So what purpose do they serve?
If it is just keeping insiders from feeling like outsiders, that's just not good enough.
Those resources would be better spent actually organizing the party.
If it takes centralizing the party to make better decisions on the ground, I can live with that.
The current model is broken.
It didn't work in Saskatoon in 1997.
And it does seem to work anywhere across the prairie west anymore.
Calling "Western alienation" won't fix the Liberal Party.
Doing so only serves to cloud the discussion on how to fix it.
His interlocutor seems to think that the solution to Western alienation is to retain the Liberal Party's provincial and territorial associations.
Respectfully, we disagree.
Outside of British Columbia, the record of the provincial associations In Western Canada, on a hit or miss scale, is mostly miss.
Provincial association conventions seem to mainly serve to elect connected insiders to ex-officio positions on the national executive. During the Martin-Chretien leadership conflict, those elections served only to further divide Liberals.
Among the small number of self-identified Liberals in Western Canada, processes that inherently divide do not serve to strengthen the party.
Other than sometimes issuing membership cards on time, it's hard to imagine what role prairie west provincial associations actually had. With centralized membership, even that role is redundant.
The last time anybody spent serious effort organizing the federal Liberal Party outside of major city Laurier Club meetings was in the lead up to the 1990 leadership convention.
In 1990, it wasn't the efforts of provincial associations that built the party but those of leadership campaigns and their supporters.
There is simply no evidence that any of the provincial associations have a plan or the resources to actually build the party in their provinces.
So what purpose do they serve?
If it is just keeping insiders from feeling like outsiders, that's just not good enough.
Those resources would be better spent actually organizing the party.
If it takes centralizing the party to make better decisions on the ground, I can live with that.
The current model is broken.
It didn't work in Saskatoon in 1997.
And it does seem to work anywhere across the prairie west anymore.
Calling "Western alienation" won't fix the Liberal Party.
Doing so only serves to cloud the discussion on how to fix it.
Friday, November 25, 2011
Thursday, November 24, 2011
When unicorns are as real as Tory spin lines
In June 2006, Stockwell Day tabled the Harper government's first bill to repeal the long gun registry.
As this blog pointed out a couple of days ago, Day's bill required gun sellers to actually check whether the buyer was licensed before selling a long gun.
At the time, the Canadian Shooting Sports Association, Canada's unregistered long gun lobby, highlighted this important public safety measure. In their words:
The same requirements to confirm licences found their way to the government's third bill to repeal the long gun registry, introduced in the Senate on April Fools Day 2009.
The Senate bill was preceded by long time gun control critic Garry Breitkreuz' Private Members Bill to repeal the long gun registry.
In Breitkeuz's bill, firearms sellers were required to call the Canada Firearms Centre to confirm that the buyer actually has a licence. And the Canada Firearms Centre had to keep a record of the call to provide a reference number for the verification.
As we all know, the Prime Minister's Office killed that bill.
PMO's adult supervision brought us Candice Hoeppner's Bill C-391. Like the Breitkreuz bill that before it, Bill C-391 forced sellers to confirm that that a buyer was licenced and all that stuff about a reference number too.
So why has the Conservative government abandoned a measure that the Conservative once messaged was key to keeping guns out of the hands of convicted criminals?
They won't say.
Hell, they won't even admit its happening.
As this blog pointed out a couple of days ago, Day's bill required gun sellers to actually check whether the buyer was licensed before selling a long gun.
At the time, the Canadian Shooting Sports Association, Canada's unregistered long gun lobby, highlighted this important public safety measure. In their words:
When the Government introduced its second long gun registry repeal bill in late 2007, it again emphasized the importance of verifying licences to "ensure that firearms do not fall into the wrong hands".
The same requirements to confirm licences found their way to the government's third bill to repeal the long gun registry, introduced in the Senate on April Fools Day 2009.
The Senate bill was preceded by long time gun control critic Garry Breitkreuz' Private Members Bill to repeal the long gun registry.
In Breitkeuz's bill, firearms sellers were required to call the Canada Firearms Centre to confirm that the buyer actually has a licence. And the Canada Firearms Centre had to keep a record of the call to provide a reference number for the verification.
As we all know, the Prime Minister's Office killed that bill.
PMO's adult supervision brought us Candice Hoeppner's Bill C-391. Like the Breitkreuz bill that before it, Bill C-391 forced sellers to confirm that that a buyer was licenced and all that stuff about a reference number too.
So why has the Conservative government abandoned a measure that the Conservative once messaged was key to keeping guns out of the hands of convicted criminals?
They won't say.
Hell, they won't even admit its happening.
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Thomas Mulcair, wanker
Regular readers of this blog will know that NDP MP and leadership candidate Thomas Mulcair is the Member of Parliament for the riding that includes École polytechnique.
Mulcair, through his silence, has already demonstrated that he's an able practitioner of the game of playing both sides of an issue but standing for nothing. It's the kind of duplicity that makes all politicians look bad. It's the kind of duplicity that helps Stephen Harper win elections.
When asked whether Mulcair would bring back the gun registry if the Tories repeal it, a spokesperson for Mulcair's campaign explained that it "is not one of the issues we’re focusing on in the leadership campaign".
Surely Canadians should expect potential NDP Prime Ministers to have position on a future long gun registry.
Two weeks before the December 6 anniversary, is it really too much to expect the MP for École polytechnique to have a view on this matter?
All of his opponents seem to have one.
Mulcair should know better.
Mulcair, through his silence, has already demonstrated that he's an able practitioner of the game of playing both sides of an issue but standing for nothing. It's the kind of duplicity that makes all politicians look bad. It's the kind of duplicity that helps Stephen Harper win elections.
When asked whether Mulcair would bring back the gun registry if the Tories repeal it, a spokesperson for Mulcair's campaign explained that it "is not one of the issues we’re focusing on in the leadership campaign".
Surely Canadians should expect potential NDP Prime Ministers to have position on a future long gun registry.
Two weeks before the December 6 anniversary, is it really too much to expect the MP for École polytechnique to have a view on this matter?
All of his opponents seem to have one.
Mulcair should know better.
Monday, November 21, 2011
That was then. This is now. We liked then better.
In June 2006, Stockwell Day introduced the Harper Tory government's first bill to repeal the long gun registry.
At the time, the government emphasized how the bill would help keep guns out of the hands of "individuals who should not have them, such as convicted criminals," and how making businesses keep transaction records would assist police investigators:
Keeping guns out of the hands of convicted criminals is, apparently, no longer a priority.
Stockwell Day, please come back. All is forgiven.
At the time, the government emphasized how the bill would help keep guns out of the hands of "individuals who should not have them, such as convicted criminals," and how making businesses keep transaction records would assist police investigators:
The amendments introduced in today's bill will require current owners to verify that a potential purchaser or another new owner of their non-restricted firearm has a valid firearms license by contacting the Chief Firearms Officer. This measure will help ensure that guns do not get into the hands of individuals who should not have them, such as convicted criminals, and to help investigators identify the owners of stolen firearms or conduct criminal investigations.In the government's 2011 Bill, those important public safety measures are now voluntary, if they exist at all.
Canada's new government has also reintroduced the requirement for businesses to maintain records of all transactions involving the sale, purchase or disposal of non-restricted firearms. This is another measure that will assist police investigators in locating owners of stolen firearms or those used in the commission of a crime.
Keeping guns out of the hands of convicted criminals is, apparently, no longer a priority.
Stockwell Day, please come back. All is forgiven.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
A gun registry case for mandatory minimum penalties
UPDATE: Our favourite reader has written to remind us that this would not be the first time that the government has held back the Commissioners Report during Parliamentary debate. The 2008 report was not released until two days after second reading of the AstroTurfed anti-gun registry private members bill, Bill C-391.
The Toronto Star is reporting that the Harper government has reinforced its efforts to strip Canada's national police service of its independence. Removing the RCMP's communications independence is the just another indication yet that Conservatives want a police force that serves the party and not the people.
We were immediately reminded of last year's efforts to suppress the RCMP's release of information that did not serve the political objective of repealing the long gun registry.
So we put our mind to the gun registry information that the government might be hiding now.
The 2009 Commissioner of Firearms Report was released on October 14, 2010.
The 2008 report was available on October 12, 2009.
The 2007 report was available on August 20, 2008.
So where is the 2010 report?
The law is clear. The Commissioner of Firearms shall report to the Minister of Public Safety, as soon as possible after the end of the calendar year, and the Minster shall table that report within 15 sitting days.
Even if it took the Commissioner of Firearms until the summer to submit a report that was due "as soon as possible" after year end, 15 sitting days would have meant that the Minsiter must have tabled it by October 7, 2011.
Assuming good will, an October tabling would have been consistent with recent practice.
So where is the 2010 report?
The Toronto Star is reporting that the Harper government has reinforced its efforts to strip Canada's national police service of its independence. Removing the RCMP's communications independence is the just another indication yet that Conservatives want a police force that serves the party and not the people.
We were immediately reminded of last year's efforts to suppress the RCMP's release of information that did not serve the political objective of repealing the long gun registry.
So we put our mind to the gun registry information that the government might be hiding now.
The 2009 Commissioner of Firearms Report was released on October 14, 2010.
The 2008 report was available on October 12, 2009.
The 2007 report was available on August 20, 2008.
So where is the 2010 report?
The law is clear. The Commissioner of Firearms shall report to the Minister of Public Safety, as soon as possible after the end of the calendar year, and the Minster shall table that report within 15 sitting days.
Even if it took the Commissioner of Firearms until the summer to submit a report that was due "as soon as possible" after year end, 15 sitting days would have meant that the Minsiter must have tabled it by October 7, 2011.
Assuming good will, an October tabling would have been consistent with recent practice.
So where is the 2010 report?
If ever there was a case for mandatory minimum penalties.
Thursday, November 17, 2011
When you don't know what you're talking about, you should just stop talking
On Thursday, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security heard from Canadian Shooting Sports Association spokesman Tony Bernardo.
Just before 36 minutes into the committee meeting, Bernardo starts to list all of the things he believes governs the import of firearms by licensed Canadian firearms business in response to a question from Tory MP Candice Hoeppner (who should know better).
Bernardo says that business imports of firearms is regulated under Section 60 of the Firearms Act.
Wrong.
Section 60 assigns firearm import and export authorization to the Registrar of Firearms.
The actual imports are regulated under Sections 42-53 of the Act.
Or they would be if those provisions were actually in force.
As the Department of Justice website notes, "Shaded provisions are not in force."
Every section from 42-53 is shaded.
Not one of those things that Tony Bernardo told Parliament happens to every firearm imported into this country actually happens.
In fact, it is so not true that in 2008 the BC Government asked that "The federal government bring into force the unproclaimed provisions of the Firearms Act and the Importation and Exportation of Firearms Regulations (Businesses) as soon as possible" to help fight gun trafficking on the Left Coast.
The Harper government did nothing.
Bernardo went on to explain that businesses had to keep firearms sales records in a "green book".
Again, this is just not true. The green book - ironically, the one that Dr. Wendy Cukier showed the Committee to illustrate her point that business records would not be kept if Bill C-19 passes - has not been produced since the 1990s. There is no authority in Canadian law for firearms businesses to keep green book records.
That's why destroying the registry's data is such a concern to police. Destroying that data means that every long gun imported, sold or registered in Canada over the last thirteen years will be untraceable. No other records were kept.
The gun lobby would be so much more credible if they actually told the truth.
Of course, the truth would undermine their rhetoric.
Just before 36 minutes into the committee meeting, Bernardo starts to list all of the things he believes governs the import of firearms by licensed Canadian firearms business in response to a question from Tory MP Candice Hoeppner (who should know better).
Bernardo says that business imports of firearms is regulated under Section 60 of the Firearms Act.
Wrong.
Section 60 assigns firearm import and export authorization to the Registrar of Firearms.
The actual imports are regulated under Sections 42-53 of the Act.
Or they would be if those provisions were actually in force.
Every section from 42-53 is shaded.
Not one of those things that Tony Bernardo told Parliament happens to every firearm imported into this country actually happens.
In fact, it is so not true that in 2008 the BC Government asked that "The federal government bring into force the unproclaimed provisions of the Firearms Act and the Importation and Exportation of Firearms Regulations (Businesses) as soon as possible" to help fight gun trafficking on the Left Coast.
The Harper government did nothing.
Bernardo went on to explain that businesses had to keep firearms sales records in a "green book".
Again, this is just not true. The green book - ironically, the one that Dr. Wendy Cukier showed the Committee to illustrate her point that business records would not be kept if Bill C-19 passes - has not been produced since the 1990s. There is no authority in Canadian law for firearms businesses to keep green book records.
That's why destroying the registry's data is such a concern to police. Destroying that data means that every long gun imported, sold or registered in Canada over the last thirteen years will be untraceable. No other records were kept.
The gun lobby would be so much more credible if they actually told the truth.
Of course, the truth would undermine their rhetoric.
It is like giving a machine gun to a monkey *
Watching gun registry opponents on twitter over the past few days has been nothing short of amusing.
One guy thinks we work for George Soros.
Another posted a photo of his small daughter hugging a sniper rifle.
And another decided that homophobia would strengthen his argument.
* We can't take credit for this formulation, but it sure applies here.
One guy thinks we work for George Soros.
Another posted a photo of his small daughter hugging a sniper rifle.
And another decided that homophobia would strengthen his argument.
* We can't take credit for this formulation, but it sure applies here.
Labels:
gun control,
gun crime,
gun lobby,
gun registry,
gun trafficking,
gun violence,
homophobia
Links
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
One of these things is much like another. And that might be inconvenient.
Big news from south of the border.
Alleged White House shooter Oscar Ortega Hernandez was arrested today in Pennsylvania.
DC media reports that Ortega Hernandez used a cheap but powerful Chinese-made assault rifle in the shooting.
What makes this shooting interesting, other than the fact that it hit a White House residential window, is that the shooter's Chinese-made SKS has been prohibited from import into the United States since 1994.
In Canada, however, the SKS is a non-restricted firearm.
Repeal of the long gun registry will mean that police in Canada will no longer know who owns a powerful Chinese-made assault rifle.
And that could become inconvenient for Stephen Harper.
It would be awfully embarrassing to have to tell Barack Obama that Canada can't be bothered to trace the type of weapon that put a hole in a White House window.
Even the US can do that.
Alleged White House shooter Oscar Ortega Hernandez was arrested today in Pennsylvania.
DC media reports that Ortega Hernandez used a cheap but powerful Chinese-made assault rifle in the shooting.
What makes this shooting interesting, other than the fact that it hit a White House residential window, is that the shooter's Chinese-made SKS has been prohibited from import into the United States since 1994.
In Canada, however, the SKS is a non-restricted firearm.
Repeal of the long gun registry will mean that police in Canada will no longer know who owns a powerful Chinese-made assault rifle.
And that could become inconvenient for Stephen Harper.
It would be awfully embarrassing to have to tell Barack Obama that Canada can't be bothered to trace the type of weapon that put a hole in a White House window.
Even the US can do that.
The factualy flawed and incorrect Vic Toews
If I was the Minister of Public Safety, I would want to make sure that my answers to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security were well rooted in fact.
Others, it seems may not share that passion.
Responding to a question from Liberal MP Francis Scarpaleggia about how police would able to trace guns should the long gun registry be repealed, Toews indicated that police could use business sales records to find those firearms.
That would have been a good answer if there was any requirement in the proposed law for businesses to actually keep useful records of who they sold guns to.
But there isn't.
The Minister of Public Safety either does not understand the Bill he presented to Parliament or he deliberately mislead the Committee.
Neither option is particularly positive.
Others, it seems may not share that passion.
Responding to a question from Liberal MP Francis Scarpaleggia about how police would able to trace guns should the long gun registry be repealed, Toews indicated that police could use business sales records to find those firearms.
That would have been a good answer if there was any requirement in the proposed law for businesses to actually keep useful records of who they sold guns to.
But there isn't.
The Minister of Public Safety either does not understand the Bill he presented to Parliament or he deliberately mislead the Committee.
Neither option is particularly positive.
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
How can you tell when Vic Toews is making shit up?
This morning, Canadian Press reported that repeal of the gun registry would increase the risk of illegal gun smuggling and trafficking.
At the Parliamentary Committee this morning, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews downplayed the risk. He maintained the bill will not result in any changes to the way border officials track guns.
Of course, he's wrong.
When the long gun registry is repealed, there will be no opportunity to verify the imports of allegedly non-restricted firearms.
That absence of review is how AK-47s slipped into Canada as uncontrolled "pellet guns".
Repealing the long gun registry will only make the trafficking easier.
At the Parliamentary Committee this morning, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews downplayed the risk. He maintained the bill will not result in any changes to the way border officials track guns.
Of course, he's wrong.
For large volumes of imported firearms the Registrar instituted a new policy in 2008, that if an individual registers ten or more firearms as imported, the Registrar will notify the CFO, who then has the option to investigate further. This may be worth investigating, for example, if the same individual is importing a high volume of the same make of gun.That's right. Vic Toews is (surprise) wrong. Imports of a large number of firearms are now subject to further review.
When the long gun registry is repealed, there will be no opportunity to verify the imports of allegedly non-restricted firearms.
That absence of review is how AK-47s slipped into Canada as uncontrolled "pellet guns".
Repealing the long gun registry will only make the trafficking easier.
More gun registry news
On November 2, the UK House of Commons European Security Committee considered EU Regulations that would implement the United Nations Firearms Protocol, a treaty designed to fight illicit firearms trafficking.
Following its review of additional information provided by Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron's government, the Committee cleared the document.
That means that the United Kingdom willfully implement this important crime fighting treaty.
Canada? Not so much.
As the Canadian Press reported this morning, repealing the long gun registry means that "Canada would no longer meet its international commitments relating to firearms tracing and record-keeping."
Following its review of additional information provided by Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron's government, the Committee cleared the document.
That means that the United Kingdom willfully implement this important crime fighting treaty.
Canada? Not so much.
As the Canadian Press reported this morning, repealing the long gun registry means that "Canada would no longer meet its international commitments relating to firearms tracing and record-keeping."
Someone should ask a Minister
Canadian Press reports today that the government knows that repeal of the long gun registry means that "Canada would no longer meet its international commitments relating to firearms tracing and record keeping."
If only the opposition had an opportunity to ask the Minister of Public Safety why he is undercutting Canada's international commitments to fight gun trafficking.
Oh right. They do. Today.
Here's hoping they use it well.
If only the opposition had an opportunity to ask the Minister of Public Safety why he is undercutting Canada's international commitments to fight gun trafficking.
Oh right. They do. Today.
Here's hoping they use it well.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Is OFAH lowering its standards to dance with the Tories on the long gun registry?
In 2004, the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters wrote a letter to then Prime Minister Paul Martin on behalf of the National Coalition of Provincial and Territorial Wildlife Federations setting out their views of what a post gun registry world should look like.
Of particular interest, is OFAH's demand that the government protect firearms sellers by allowing them to confirm firearms licences before a gun sale and, importantly, receive verification that he or she actually made that call:
In 2004, OFAH wanted a system that would confirm that firearms owners had checked to see whether a buyer's licence is valid. In short, providing and keeping verification numbers would provide a "the government said it was OK" defence for gun sellers in the event that the buyer misused a firearm.
At the Public Safety Committee this week, OFAH is (presumably) supporting a bill that explicitly prohibits the government from keeping the kind of record that OFAH once argued protects both the seller and the buyer. Even in cases where a seller calls the voluntary licence confirmation line to confirm whether or not a licence is valid, no verification number will be issued and no record will be kept. There will be no proof.
The Government, it seems, happy to leave gun sellers at the mercy of the courts in wrongful death and injury suits. And OFAH is (presumably) happy to let them swing too.
Of particular interest, is OFAH's demand that the government protect firearms sellers by allowing them to confirm firearms licences before a gun sale and, importantly, receive verification that he or she actually made that call:
9) The O.F.A.H. and the N.C.P.T.W.F. support the creation of a 1-800 number to allow private firearms owners to check and receive a verification number when selling a firearm to another private licensed owner to insure that no warnings or suspensions against the license of a purchaser exist - the provision of this service operates in the interests of public safety and also protects both the seller and the buyer;On Tuesday, Greg Farrant, one of the signatories of that letter, will appear before the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security in (presumably) support of Bill C-19, the government's radical plan to repeal the long gun registry and firearms sales accountability.
In 2004, OFAH wanted a system that would confirm that firearms owners had checked to see whether a buyer's licence is valid. In short, providing and keeping verification numbers would provide a "the government said it was OK" defence for gun sellers in the event that the buyer misused a firearm.
At the Public Safety Committee this week, OFAH is (presumably) supporting a bill that explicitly prohibits the government from keeping the kind of record that OFAH once argued protects both the seller and the buyer. Even in cases where a seller calls the voluntary licence confirmation line to confirm whether or not a licence is valid, no verification number will be issued and no record will be kept. There will be no proof.
The Government, it seems, happy to leave gun sellers at the mercy of the courts in wrongful death and injury suits. And OFAH is (presumably) happy to let them swing too.
Friday, November 11, 2011
With friends like this
As anybody who follows Canadian politics should know, NDP MP Thomas Mulcair is MP for École Polytechnique.
As an NDP leadership candidate, Mulcair has just been presented his first big dilemma. And that dilemma links his leadership aspirations right to back to the riding he represents.
Thunder Bay-Rainy River NDP John Rafferty is one of the few non-Quebec MPs to have endorsed Mulcair.
Rafferty says he's "quite eager to cast a vote to abolish the Long Gun Registry, a position for which the NDP has already warned and disciplined Rafferty.
We're confident that the NDP will do the right thing again if Rafferty continues to vote with the Tories on this important tool for protecting vulnerable women and children.
We're disappointed, however, that the MP for École Polytechnique has done nothing at all.
We all expected better.
As an NDP leadership candidate, Mulcair has just been presented his first big dilemma. And that dilemma links his leadership aspirations right to back to the riding he represents.
Thunder Bay-Rainy River NDP John Rafferty is one of the few non-Quebec MPs to have endorsed Mulcair.
Rafferty says he's "quite eager to cast a vote to abolish the Long Gun Registry, a position for which the NDP has already warned and disciplined Rafferty.
We're confident that the NDP will do the right thing again if Rafferty continues to vote with the Tories on this important tool for protecting vulnerable women and children.
We're disappointed, however, that the MP for École Polytechnique has done nothing at all.
We all expected better.
Wednesday, November 09, 2011
More facts that gun registry opponents will deny
Once again, their assertions of long gun registry opponents have little connection to actual facts.
79.7% of firearms seized by Canadian law enforcement agencies are non-restricted long guns - the very same rifles and shotguns that will be deregistered if Bill C-19 passes.
Canada's unregistered gun lobby is fighting hard to prevent police from knowing where those seized guns came from. They call it a "new-found fairness and freedom for sports shooters, hunters and trappers".
We wonder what they have to hide
Tuesday, November 08, 2011
Long gun registry helps fight domestic homicide, police chief says
There's also many cases Sean, that happen daily and right across this country, where the police will go to an incidence of domestic violence where there is concern that if there are firearms in the house that they might be used to commit violence and even murders. And we've had far too many such tragedies in this country. The police officers are able to determine by checking the registry, not only that the person living in that address has a license, but also what guns they possess. And we've had so many cases where they've done a quick examination or a search, and found a few guns; check the registry and discover that there are dozens more. And that enables us to go and get the search documents and to conduct a more thorough search to make sure that we remove all of the weapons from that potentially dangerous situation. And by taking those guns out of that situation it gives us an opportunity to prevent crimes and save lives, and we do this virtually every day.
Monday, November 07, 2011
On fact based policy making
The gun lobby will tell you that police don't use gun registry information to make tactical decisions.
They couldn't be more wrong.
They couldn't be more wrong.
After discovering their suspect had several guns registered to him, Camrose police decided to call in the RCMP Emergency Response Team, Foreman said.
One of these things is not like the other
89% of domestic shooting homicide victims are female.
The bill before Parliament will make it easier for domestic abusers to arm up.
John Rafferty and Bruce Hyer are upset that they were disciplined for supporting that bill.
The bill before Parliament will make it easier for domestic abusers to arm up.
John Rafferty and Bruce Hyer are upset that they were disciplined for supporting that bill.
Sunday, November 06, 2011
Hearing voices
The gun lobby will tell you their fight against the gun registry is about heritage.
They'll tell you about the first time they went hunting.
They'll tell you about their first duck/deer/moose.
They'll tell you about their coming of age moment, their first 22 calibre rifle.
They'll tell you that those guns dont pose any threat to anybody.
They won't tell you that someone could use that 22 to kill their spouse.
It kind of undermines their argument.
They'll tell you about the first time they went hunting.
They'll tell you about their first duck/deer/moose.
They'll tell you about their coming of age moment, their first 22 calibre rifle.
They'll tell you that those guns dont pose any threat to anybody.
They won't tell you that someone could use that 22 to kill their spouse.
It kind of undermines their argument.
Thursday, November 03, 2011
The Seinfeldian candidate
It's becoming harder to consider NDP leadership candidate Nathan Cullen as a serious contender.
Cullen's failure to take a stand on the Tory bill to repeal the long gun registry is just another demonstration that he either doesn't understand that New Democrats want "to make sure that Canadians know which way that we vote" or was putting his leadership aspirations ahead of whatever principles he might have left.
Leading up to the vote, Cullen was clear.
He explained that he is "a gun-control candidate."
He called the Tory gun registry bill "ignorant" and "spiteful".
He said the plan to destroy gun registry data is "stupid".
He called for changes in the bill, explaining that, "You can't just destroy government records because it is politically beneficial".
The poor delicate snowflake even said that the "poison pill" in the government's proposal was making him feel "quite conflicted".
When the moment to take a stand against a spiteful, ignorant, stupid, poison pill filled proposal came, Nathan Cullen became his own Seinfeld episode.
After talking a big game, Nathan Cullen stood up for nothing.
To which we can only say, "Yada. Yada. Yada."
Cullen's failure to take a stand on the Tory bill to repeal the long gun registry is just another demonstration that he either doesn't understand that New Democrats want "to make sure that Canadians know which way that we vote" or was putting his leadership aspirations ahead of whatever principles he might have left.
Leading up to the vote, Cullen was clear.
He explained that he is "a gun-control candidate."
He called the Tory gun registry bill "ignorant" and "spiteful".
He said the plan to destroy gun registry data is "stupid".
He called for changes in the bill, explaining that, "You can't just destroy government records because it is politically beneficial".
The poor delicate snowflake even said that the "poison pill" in the government's proposal was making him feel "quite conflicted".
When the moment to take a stand against a spiteful, ignorant, stupid, poison pill filled proposal came, Nathan Cullen became his own Seinfeld episode.
After talking a big game, Nathan Cullen stood up for nothing.
To which we can only say, "Yada. Yada. Yada."
Labels:
gun control,
gun crime,
gun registry,
gun violence,
Nathan Cullen,
NDP,
New Democratic Party,
Skeena
Links
Wednesday, November 02, 2011
Credit where credit is due and darts where they are deserved
It's nice to see the NDP taking a principled stand on the life saving long gun registry.
Well, most of them anyway.
Who does Nathan Cullen think he's playing to by slinking away from the vote hoping nobody would notice?
That's not leadership.
Well, most of them anyway.
Who does Nathan Cullen think he's playing to by slinking away from the vote hoping nobody would notice?
That's not leadership.
Breaking gun registry news from the pre-internet era
Canada's unregistered gun lobby says that repealing the long gun registry will "lighten the legislative burden sports shooters and hunters face every day".
They fail to note that the last terrorist murder in Canada was committed with a shotgun.
To be fair to them, however, noting that the new bill will lighten the legislative burden on terrorists is probably off message.
They fail to note that the last terrorist murder in Canada was committed with a shotgun.
To be fair to them, however, noting that the new bill will lighten the legislative burden on terrorists is probably off message.
Tuesday, November 01, 2011
Worth reading. Worth correcting.
This morning, the Toronto Star published an interesting article on the impacts of the Tory war on vulnerable Canadians long gun registry repeal bill.
I won't repeat the core of the story. Suffice to say it is discussed here, here, here, and here.
But the Star story misses a key point.
The seller of those firearms, or any other long gun powerful enough to pierce police body armour, only needs to see a licence card.
The seller doesn't need to check if a buyer's licence card is valid. Hell, he or she doesn't even need to check if it's real.
It's not like the Tories are hiding this (even if they aren't talking about it). Article 23.1(1) in Bill C-19 refers to licence checks by sellers as a "Voluntary request to Registrar". (Emphasis added unnecessarily for added drama.)
Canada's premier gun lobby has figured it out.
Would it be too much for the Star to get it right too?
I won't repeat the core of the story. Suffice to say it is discussed here, here, here, and here.
But the Star story misses a key point.
The seller of those firearms, or any other long gun powerful enough to pierce police body armour, only needs to see a licence card.
The seller doesn't need to check if a buyer's licence card is valid. Hell, he or she doesn't even need to check if it's real.
It's not like the Tories are hiding this (even if they aren't talking about it). Article 23.1(1) in Bill C-19 refers to licence checks by sellers as a "Voluntary request to Registrar". (Emphasis added unnecessarily for added drama.)
Canada's premier gun lobby has figured it out.
Would it be too much for the Star to get it right too?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)