Ignatieff open to changing gun registry - Macleans.ca

Ignatieff open to changing gun registry

Liberal leader says decriminalizing long-gun registry should remain an option


Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff says his party supports “the principle of gun control” but recognizes its application is a tough sell in rural Canada. The solution, he says, may be to “decriminalize” the long-gun registry. Ignatieff’s newfound openness to reform efforts comes ahead of a key Commons vote that could be a prelude to a total repeal of the long-gun registry. A private member’s bill sponsored by Conservative MP Candice Hoeppner is expected to find enough supporters among both Conservative and opposition MPs to get through a second reading later today. Under the terms of Hoeppner’s bill, longstanding controls on restricted handguns and prohibited weapons would remain, as would requirements that gun owners hold a valid license, but owners of rifles and shotguns would no longer have to register their weapons.
Toronto Star

Filed under:

Ignatieff open to changing gun registry

  1. Oh good, nobody cares. Next stop, abolishing something else we rural Canadians hate. The CWB.

    • You country bumpkins get worked up about silly crap.

      • We do, because you urbanites keep poking your nose in our business and lousing everything up!

        I mean, how many times do we have to say that the wheat board is a pro-corporate agribusiness, environmentally unfriendly, nakedly inefficient, and completely unecessary organization that has to rely on fines and state enforcement in order to maintain membership? It isn't like there aren't dozens of other marketing boards in agriculture that have voluntary membership and function much better as a result of actually having to serve the people they represent to maintain membership rolls.

        Yet for some reason, urbanites think that it is a matter of greatest importance that the CWB remain involuntary, even though the only way it affects them is by poisoning rural votes towards progressive parties. It is bizarre.

        • Beef producers are begging for another handout.

          Beef producers are asking the Harper government for help, saying they face a "perfect storm."
          They say mounting debt, inadequate insurance, unfair trade barriers and a strong dollar handicaps their foreign market prospects.
          They've turned to the NDP to help them make their case to the Harper government, claiming aid to them would help all Canadians.

          I guess we urbanites should just tell them to piss off so as to not louse everything up, right. I'm sure that will win lots of votes for progressive parties.

          • Well, given that a lot of problems in the beef industry have their root causes in toxic government interference in the first place (such as giving incentives to produce too many cattle) then I would yes, you probably should.

            The death of the family farm due to increased input costs and decreasing product costs at the farm gate can be laid squarely at the foot of bad governmental agricultural policy over the last 70 years.

          • I'm not convinced the the family farm is such a great economic model to maintain – I realize the idea of a family farm is romantic and creates images of the hardy pioneer fighting against all disasters to rise above them and succeed, but the reality is that that idea of the family farm left the building decades ago, probably after WW1. But is it still raised every time someone wants to bash big farms

            But back the gun registry – it was conceived as a club to beat up the PCs during the 1993 election (long after the Montreal massacre which it would not have stopped) and win votes in Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver (which it did). On top of that it was poorly conceived – two 12 year olds with a lap top could do a better job in creating a workable registry. The fundamental flaw is that it assumes criminals will only commit crimes with registered weapons (didn't happen with handguns which have always been licensed so who was the brains who thought it would happen with long guns!) and does nothing to stop smuggling guns into Canada.

          • The family farm is more efficient than a factory farm in many ways. A family farm can make better use of acreage, better use of resources, and spend more time in maintaining the land. Smaller units of production can also maintain a greater variety of produce and thus appeal to more niche markets. In other words, large farms can do mono-cultures very well, but not a variety of produce or varieties of a type of produce.

            I'll give you two examples of how larger farms were encouraged over smaller, more local farms. Milk quotas are the most obvious, given that you need hundreds of thousands of dollars set aside to buy the quota to sell milk commercially. That pretty much ensures that only a large vested interest can set up a dairy farm, and the quotas are being increasingly concentrated amongst a few. No quota system, smaller farms can start up again. The other example is not being able to grow wheat and grind it up yourself to compete with larger mills, because you are compelled by law to sell it to the CWB, and then buy it back. The CWB for its part can only exist to pool large amounts of grain together and sell it to Cargill. Thus, the CWB stands in the way of smaller start up companies for food products involving wheat and malt barley.

            There are many policies like those two that favour industrial scale farming over family farms as a matter of public policy, largely resulting unintentionally with initial socialist goals in mind.

          • Well, given that a lot of problems in the beef industry have their root causes in toxic government interference in the first place…

            You didn't even read the short piece I posted, did you. The problems are "mounting debt, inadequate insurance, unfair trade barriers and a strong dollar." None of these are a result of toxic government interference.

          • Yeah, talking to you with your attitude that you know anything at all about agricultural policy is going to make me mad, given you feel you can lecture anyone about agricultural policy without any background in it. I know much more about how the government encouraged people to take out massive loans to create large feedlots, and then when the inevitable over-supply and changing market conditions happened, they were stuck holding the bag. The government currently has a program in place to give loans to large scale hog barns and cull the amount of stock.

            As for unfair trade barriers, the biggest problem with Canada's meat trade is the fact that we had this huge herd fed up in Canada, shipped live across the border to the US, with most of it then being shipped back in boxes. It was a market model that can only come about with intensive government interference at all levels. When you had problems with mad cow, increased US subsidies, a slower moving border and other problems, you can see why the insurance was "inadequate". None of this is really something that would be covered by insurance.

          • The family farm is a relic I'm sorry to say. (And I grew up on one.) Agriculture started moving towards greater and greater economies of scale years ago, and shows no signs of slowing down on that front. As Maureen has already mentioned, family farms just aren't a very good economic model anymore.. They were at one time, when agriculture was largely labour intensive, and large families could do that work. Farming is now capital instensiive – with rising input costs (as you've already mentioned) and that's a tough thing for any small business to swallow. Trade barriers are always a bugger, and our own government has little control over those. I don't buy the line that government ruined family farming any more than I buy the line that government ruined the fishing industry.

            I'm with you on the gun registry though. The sooner that thing is trashed, the better.

  2. Well … well … well … when the going gets tough Iffy gets going and rolls over again – this guy is turning out to be a better friend to us conservatives than Dion was. Not surpised though!

  3. Thank goodness some common sense snuck into parliament for a day!

  4. they could have taken the two billion or so used on this program and just kept users of illegal guns in jail longer..
    everybody knows a real criminal isn't going to register their gun …i haven't heard of legal gun owners being a problem in this country

  5. I'd feel a whole lot better about Iggys flip-flop if he came out and said the Fiberal Party of Canuckistan would cover the waste of taxpayer money since that brainwave Rock tried to force feed this crap.

  6. The complicated firearms control system devised by the Liberals was absolutely necessary to achieve this. air soft gun