Return of Long Gun Registry

[Gun Nut]

The reason that C-51 came up, was that some on here, were-are upset the police would want people to report someone with a bow in the area where the shooting took place. They felt some of their freedom was being compromised because the police would dare check them out. Like being investigated because you dared to attend a rally against a pipeline, et al. How do you feel about carding? I guess you feel it is OK , but only if they check others, not you. You can't have it both ways.

May it wasn't, "a case of being upset the police would want people to report someone with a bow in the area where the shooting took place." Owing to the relatively short range of the bow, unbeknownst to the police maybe they actually spoke to the archer, who was doing some backyard target practicing, when a flyer took off on him, and accidentally found an unintended mark. I would have to surmise it might be something of shock, to the individual in question, being told by the police, about an arrow found in someone chest, that might in fact be the flyer they released. Labeling it as a homicide may very well, convinced the shooter to raise a concern.

You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
-Gun Nut

[mooboy76]

They're basically giving the police what they want.

The police look at this like police: they have a charge in the Criminal Code for possession in a place not authorized, and they need to have the necessary evidence. The ATT gives them that. They don't like the blanket ATT because the burden of proof is higher: they would have to show that a person possessed a gun in a place that was not reasonably between any two possible points that would be covered by the blanket ATT.

This is, obviously, a funny attitude. But that's what the motivation seems to be when you look carefully at what the cops say.

I'd like to know how many charges they've ever laid for possession in a place not authorized against a person with an RPAL. Not many, I'd wager.

I see that on the surface of their argument.

I guess my incomprehension comes from the fact that the police were already in a similar situation just some years ago in Ontario, and were still facing those blanket ATT conditions in various provinces or territories when C-42 was passed. The only real difference is that the RPAL holder could forget to toss that piece of paper in with the firearm.

I doubt that because a few CFOs decided to start cutting away valid locations on their ATTs, it helped police across the country in any significant way.

Even before C-42 received assent, in the more restrictive provinces, you could have some club invites in your pocket and reasonably claim you were headed to any of those.

It seems unlikely that the valid RPAL holder, with no flags on the system, conforming with transport regulations, and offering a reasonable and valid location would be out to cause trouble; or that the now standard ATT conditions will cause low compliance with regulations for transport.

It doesn't compute for me, although I don't think I'm their target audience - except on paper.

[terrym]

Gun control laws aren't based in logic but mostly politics. The transport process was ridiculous and consumed expensive police manpower. You were basically paying an OPP officer $100k a year plus pension to oversee RPAL owners to use the firearms in legal venues. These RPAL shooters had already gone through extensive background checks and testing and were approved as safe. I would compare the process to granting a person a motorcycle license after taking a course and passing a test and then requiring to clear all travel plans in writing with the DOT because a SUZUKI Katana 750 is potentially deadly and nobody "needs" a high powered sportbike designed to go 200kmh. using the lefty logic "NOBODY NEEDS A RACEBIKE LIKE THAT FOR TRANSPORTATION".

[welsh]

Carrying on, complete NDP platform released tonight. Contains no gun control proposals.

[bushman]

Carrying on, complete NDP platform released tonight. Contains no gun control proposals.

Honestly welsh, do you actually think they would mention gun control at this stage of the game???

Angry Tom ain't the quickest bunny in the bushes, but he is a little quicker than a turtle. Any mention of gun control today would have been political suicide, and another nail in his coffin.

[trimmer21]

Honestly welsh, do you actually think they would mention gun control at this stage of the game???

Angry Tom ain't the quickest bunny in the bushes, but he is a little quicker than a turtle. Any mention of gun control today would have been political suicide, and another nail in his coffin.

I don't know about that. It doesn't seem to be slowing the shiny pony down,at all,even after he just had his butt nailed by CSSA and NFA.

[welsh]

Honestly welsh, do you actually think they would mention gun control at this stage of the game???

Angry Tom ain't the quickest bunny in the bushes, but he is a little quicker than a turtle. Any mention of gun control today would have been political suicide, and another nail in his coffin.

You may have missed my long-standing point that, contrary to right-wing belief, the NDP is generally ambivalent about gun control because it needs northern ridings. You may also have missed my point that politicians do what they think will deliver votes.

I'm not sure why people think gun control is "political suicide." Gun owners in Canada are a pretty small voting block and the people who act like single-issue voters on gun control would almost all vote Conservative anyway, if it were not an issue. Parties trot out gun control proposals when they think there's an advantage to be gained.

It is interesting that the NDP would still be silent on gun control given their need to rally support in Quebec. I half-expected them to include something in the official platform for just this reason. The Liberals apparently think gun control proposals will deliver votes. The conservatives have used the gun registry as a means of rallying the voting block of single-issue gun owners. But the NDP is declining to campaign on it.

In any case, it's the least relevant platform right now, because the NDP is no longer the front runner and is unlikely to form the government.

[mosquito]

You may have missed my long-standing point that, contrary to right-wing belief, the NDP is generally ambivalent about gun control because it needs northern ridings. You may also have missed my point that politicians do what they think will deliver votes.

I'm not sure why people think gun control is "political suicide." Gun owners in Canada are a pretty small voting block and the people who act like single-issue voters on gun control would almost all vote Conservative anyway, if it were not an issue. Parties trot out gun control proposals when they think there's an advantage to be gained.

It is interesting that the NDP would still be silent on gun control given their need to rally support in Quebec. I half-expected them to include something in the official platform for just this reason. The Liberals apparently think gun control proposals will deliver votes. The conservatives have used the gun registry as a means of rallying the voting block of single-issue gun owners. But the NDP is declining to campaign on it.

In any case, it's the least relevant platform right now, because the NDP is no longer the front runner and is unlikely to form the government.

\

Uh.... your proof? The empirical evidence says exactly the opposite and thanks to video we can even see every word.... your statement seems to suggest a wish rather than a reality. By his comments he talks about "the Liberal" gun registry.

"What kind of duck do you hunt with an assault weapon? A pterodactyl?" - Tom Mulcair

"Track every gun" - Tom Mulcair


You can hear him actually say it here.
http://www.therebel.media/a_gun_regi...eau_or_mulcair

Tom Mulcair says NDP would give police tools to track all guns
'What kind of duck do you hunt with an assault weapon? A pterodactyl?'
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tom-...guns-1.2859581




Also in their 2015 policy they want to give municipalities and provinces the ability to ban handguns and you can listen to Mulcair here too.
http://www.therebel.media/the_ndp_wa...er_to_ban_guns

[welsh]

I'm well aware of those statements.

Go through Mulcair's history and you will find any number of statements on any number of subjects, at odds with current NDP promises and policies. Why? Because that was what he thought at the time, or that was what he felt would give him an advantage at the time. Politicians promise what they think will play well, and Mulcair is a politician through and through. He cares about votes. He cares about advantage.

The NDP has a long-standing ambivalence about gun control which is plain when you take a look at that party's history. That ambivalence is driven by simple electoral realities, i.e. their reliance on northern ridings for support. When Mulcair was quoted in the press saying he wanted the registry restored, other senior party figures promptly said the opposite and the issue was not mentioned again.

I'm just sharing the party platforms here, as I find them, and trying to clue people in to the electoral realities we see reflected in the polls.

Fact: no references to gun control in the NDP platform. This does not require proof. You can read it yourself.

[mosquito]

I'm well aware of those statements.

Go through Mulcair's history and you will find any number of statements on any number of subjects, at odds with current NDP promises and policies. Why? Because that was what he thought at the time, or that was what he felt would give him an advantage at the time. Politicians promise what they think will play well, and Mulcair is a politician through and through. He cares about votes. He cares about advantage.

The NDP has a long-standing ambivalence about gun control which is plain when you take a look at that party's history. That ambivalence is driven by simple electoral realities, i.e. their reliance on northern ridings for support. When Mulcair was quoted in the press saying he wanted the registry restored, other senior party figures promptly said the opposite and the issue was not mentioned again.

I'm just sharing the party platforms here, as I find them, and trying to clue people in to the electoral realities we see reflected in the polls.

Fact: no references to gun control in the NDP platform. This does not require proof. You can read it yourself.

.... actually FICTION.

1) The tracking he has clearly said and two the ban is in their Policy book.

FACT:
https://charrois.files.wordpress.com...olicy-book.pdf


3.8 Justice and crime prevention
Stopping the smuggling of illegal firearms and
enable all municipalities, provinces, and territories
to implement a ban on handguns.