Will you sell your banned guns to the Government or keep them?

[MikePal]

A better political strategy and a legal one would be to turn them in and accept compensation. If gun owners run up the government's costs then non-gun owners might start questioning the wisdom of spending a billion of their dollars buying back guns that were rarely a problem in the first place. The long gun registry wasn't defeated on principles but on the costs.

No the Gun registry was defeated by a change in Government with a promise to abolish it...the savings in cost overruns was just a bonus to help Liberal supporters choke it down. In the end it was a Knee jerk policy with no merit...much like the OIC that may not even get a legal 'pass' by the Supreme Court. So far the Liberals have not shown any evidence that it will accomplish anything.

[mosquito]

No the Gun registry was defeated by a change in Government with a promise to abolish it...the savings in cost overruns was just a bonus to help Liberal supporters choke it down. In the end it was a Knee jerk policy with no merit...much like the OIC that may not even get a legal 'pass' by the Supreme Court. So far the Liberals have not shown any evidence that it will accomplish anything.

The OIC and C-21 did do something, several things:
1) create a claim (not reality) they were doing something about firearm violence
2) create an US vs Them (the scary firearm owners) to divide and gain votes
3) create something to lie about to further divide and gain votes (the educated and informed minority and the uninformed or ideologues that would vote for them regardless)
4) create a "if you vote for them" *insert lies like handguns at playgrounds or "they want open carry and to own automatics" and other fear mongering lies
5) with the fear mongering and lies and CBC the possibility of a majority govt that can block corruption investigations and prevent the people from figuring out how incompetent and corrupt they actually are
6) Create a chance or opportunity to do more bans if there is no improvement (there won't be since they also reduced sentences on criminals C-22) and a tool they can use to further divide people for future elections
7) an excuse through C-71 and C-21 etc. to have firearm tracking (a registry), they spent $400,000,000,000 without a budget and without accountability in the name of public safety what's another 1 or 2 for a registry.

Just look at the comments by Trudeau and Blair, they have already started mentioning "sniper rifles" so there is another block they can ban. Probably proving again that Justlied is nothing but unethical and a liar.

[Badenoch]

No the Gun registry was defeated by a change in Government with a promise to abolish it...the savings in cost overruns was just a bonus to help Liberal supporters choke it down. In the end it was a Knee jerk policy with no merit...much like the OIC that may not even get a legal 'pass' by the Supreme Court. So far the Liberals have not shown any evidence that it will accomplish anything.

What made the change feasible for the Harper government was the cost and being able to call it a "billion dollar boondoggle." If public opinion had strongly favoured the gun registry then it would still be in place today.

[MikePal]

What made the change feasible for the Harper government was the cost and being able to call it a "billion dollar boondoggle." If public opinion had strongly favoured the gun registry then it would still be in place today.

Harper had a majority ...public opinion wasn't going to sway the inevitable when it was a cornerstone promise of his election platform. The money had nothing to do with it at that point, just another reason.

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews told reporters Wednesday, hours before the vote, that the government’s actions are long overdue.

“It does nothing to help put an end to gun crimes, nor has it saved one Canadian life,” he said.

“It criminalizes hard-working and law-abiding citizens such as farmers and sport shooters, and it has been a billion-dollar boondoggle left to us by the previous Liberal government.”

[Badenoch]

Harper had a majority ...public opinion wasn't going to sway the inevitable when it was a cornerstone promise of his election platform. The money had nothing to do with it at that point, just another reason.

Note that Toews used the phrase "billion dollar boondoggle" when bringing in the legislation. By focusing on the cost to taxpayers and the lack of results it justified the decision to non-gun owners and made it difficult for the supporters of the registry to counter.

It would be good to do the same in this round. If it's cheap non-gun owners won't care. If it costs them a billion dollars it might get their attention.

[MikePal]

It would be good to do the same in this round. If it's cheap non-gun owners won't care. If it costs them a billion dollars it might get their attention.

Do you really think a Leftist voter will change their vote because the Liberal government spent a $Billion on a Gun control issue ??

The money that will be spent will be called a Liberal boondoggle but that will NOT affect anyone's political alliance.

[Badenoch]

Do you really think a Leftist voter will change their vote because the Liberal government spent a $Billion on a Gun control issue ??

The money that will be spent will be called a Liberal boondoggle but that will NOT affect anyone's political alliance.

Leftist? No. Middle-ground voters that switch among parties? Yes. Harper proved that. He made no secret of his plans to disband the registry and they voted for him anyway.