Mulcair on the long gun registry

While we’re sorting out everyone’s position on the gun registry, here are Thomas Mulcair’s comments to reporters after QP yesterday.

The NDP’s position on the gun registry is that we favor the rgistration of guns. There were irritants in the former system. That doesn’t mean that you roll back public protection. Registration of guns helps protect the public, period. That’s why every policy force in Canada except Calgary’s is in favor of the registration of guns. The NDP favors the registration of guns, especially this week which is the week that contains the anniversary of the terrible tragedy at Polytechnique. We will continue to say clearly that we favor the registration of guns, period…

What we’ve said is that the registration of guns is essential to help protect the public. We would bring back a form of registration. We would be certain to avoid some of the pitfalls of the last version. For example, the police have said clearly that they never asked and it wasn’t necessary that the only possible treatment of an offence was under the criminal code. They said that that went too far. For example, if someone had simply skipped a beat administratively, not only were their guns seized during a hunting trip, they were subject to a huge fine and they had a criminal record. The police have said “You should just give us the option of treating it criminally or administratively”. That’s the type of thing that you could do, but every police force in this country with the exception of one has said that it helps protect the public and it helps protect them. A young police officer going to the door of a home where there’s been a signaling of a domestic dispute should know whether there are guns or not on the other side of that door.




Browse

Mulcair on the long gun registry

  1. Muclair so far has the only reasonable position on the gun registry.

    • It is reasonable. Reasonable to criminals who don’t register guns and thus don’t use it.
      Reasonable to Public Sector Unions who get generous taxpayer financed jobs for doing very little to administer it. Reasonable for law enforcement who get one more avenue of access to personal and private information.

      • no.

      • Same argument applies to vehicle licensing.
        And the other side is, if we happen to catch a criminal who hasn’t registered their gun, then we have a reason to take said gun away, even if they get off of the other crime through some technicality.

        • The criminal won’t have a licence. Registration is redundant and impossible at that point.

          • Try reading. Here, let me point out the bit you seem to have missed: “then we have a reason to take said gun away, even if they get off of the other crime through some technicality.”

            Consider, with no registry, law enforcement has no recourse to take a gun away from a person if some sort of mistrial occurs on the main offence.

  2. Mulcair doesn’t even realize those issues, which are real problems with Canadas gun laws, are with C-68, not the gun registry. The gun registry has never made anyone safer, it is simply a political wedge issue that they all use for leverage. Sure, the Chiefs of Police are all for a gun registry… but keep in mind that they were also AGAINST the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and all for the warrantless access to your internet.

    • I like it when the police know where the guns of the 2000 people who have their license revoked each year are. That alone should justify the registry (although not some of the cost over-runs, which had been fixed by the time it was killed).

      • If C-68 were not so heinous, and the drive to ban guns not so irrationally feverish, then the gun registry would not be much of an issue today. C-68 and Liberal hubris are to thank for where we are, and will be responsible for massive non-compliance if another gun registry is proposed.

      • You are confusing the registry with licensing and prohibition. Registration is simply a list of who owns what. Licenses and prohibitions are separate and were not affected by abolishing the LGR.

  3. “Registration of guns helps protect the public, period.”
    –Stats Can 1978 – present shows that the 1995 Firearms Act didn’t do a thing for public safety.

    “That’s why every policy force in Canada except Calgary’s is in favor of the registration of guns.”
    – The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police are a lobby group that has joined IANSA. Front line officers don’t support registration. Google ‘Randy Kuntz registry survey’.

    “…especially this week which is the week that contains the anniversary of the terrible tragedy at Polytechnique.”
    –What does memorializing victims of murder prove about the effectiveness of a policy? Laws aren’t memorials.

    “For example, the police have said clearly that they never asked and
    it wasn’t necessary that the only possible treatment of an offence was
    under the criminal code. They said that that went too far.”
    –Mr. Mulcair doesn’t seem to understand how draconian licensing is, let alone registration. Every gun owner in Canada is an instant criminal the second they let their license expire.

    “For example, if someone had simply skipped a beat administratively,
    not only were their guns seized during a hunting trip, they were subject
    to a huge fine and they had a criminal record.”
    –This is the tip of the injustice iceberg. The entire Firearms Act is riddled with it.
    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/10/17/solomon-friedman-firearms-laws-deny-law-abiding-citizens-their-rights/
    http://www.canadianlawyermag.com/burlew-fires-bulls-eye-in-defending-firearms-violation-cases.html
    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/02/01/lorne-gunter-canadas-laws-on-the-safe-storage-of-firearms-need-clarifying/

    “A young police officer going to the door of a home where there’s
    been a signaling of a domestic dispute should know whether there are
    guns or not on the other side of that door.”
    – Ask Daniel Tessier and Valerie Gignac how ‘the gun registry keeps police officers safe’.

    • Progressives like to flog the l’Ecole Polytechnique shooting, without admitting the politically incorrect truth: the killer (Gamil Gharbi–’Mark Lepine’ was a pseudonym) was the product of a muticultural home, with a Muslim father that beat misogyny into his son. And the surge in urban gang and gun violence is largely tractable to open-door immigration policies:

      http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/01/18/shower-posse-jamaica-gang-toronto.html

      Prior to the Trudeau era, Canada actually had less strict gun control than the U.S. Federal Gun Control Act. Yet Eatons Centre-type shootings were unheard of. Yet progressives refuse to acknowledge the negative effects of basically unscreened third world immigration on public safety, OR domestic violence:

      http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2012/05/30/calgary-honour-violence.html

  4. A backgrounder on the previous failed attempt at firearms registration:

    http://www.lowe.ca/Rick/FirearmsLegislation/AGangThatCouldn%27tShootStraight.html

    “The RCMP had stopped accepting FAC records, and had actually destroyed
    those it already had. The FAC registry system didn’t exist because the police
    thought it was useless and refused to waste their limited budgets maintaining
    it. They also moved to ensure that their political masters could not resurrect
    it.”

    The Dipsticks have two reasons for wanting to reboot this failed experiment. First of all, resurrecting the make-work program for their PSAC and CUPE donors. Secondly, social engineering. Progressives, especially of the socialist persuasion, really don’t like the rabble to be armed. Rather–as in Cuba, China, etc.–they want force to remain in the exclusive domain of the state.

    We’re not drinking your Kool-Aid. Thom. And even taking out a twelfth mortgage on your house to fund your campaign (or whatever else) won’t save your party from what will be an inevitable loss of seats in the next election.

  5. Note to Mulcair: if a young police officer relies on a registry to tell him if there’s a gun in the house or not, he won’t live to be an old police officer.

  6. That’s the first clear explanation I’ve heard about how to move forward on this. No politics, just common sense.

  7. Mulclair can’t change reality by adding “period!” to the end of incorrect statements. The registry saved zero lives and prevented zero crimes.

    Wow, big deal, he wants to give police the option of an administrative charge, that’s totally meaningless when a person still faces the possibility of a criminal charge. An offense cannot be both criminal and administrative.

    As has been said thousands of times, every cop must assume there are guns on the other side of the door, the registry cannot be relied upon to positively say there are or are not guns in any particular place. Guess what, the government can make a list of where they think the guns are, but freethinking people can violate the list and move the guns elsewhere. Ooops!

  8. Actually I would expect nothing less from theNDP. After all, they are a socialist party.So was the Nazi Party in Germany and they wanted all those guns registered so that they could confscate them and run the country wiithout those nasty citzens interfering when they came for them in the mddle of the night. After all, they had concentration camps to fill and Jews to exterminate.
    Give me a break.
    The only ones who were for the retention of the long gun registry in Canada were the chiefs of police not the average cop poundng the pavement. It was a complete and utter waste of tme, money, and resources..

  9. Mulcair, your statement:
    “Registration of guns helps protect the public, period.”
    Is a broad sloppy generalization with more falsehood than truth.
    Your statement lacks definition/detail; it is meaningless/

    You TWIST words/meanings by dropping off the prefix word LONG from your gun registry statement. Political huffing and puffing and emotional manipulation.
    I can not vote for that.

    We are talking LONG get it LONG gun registry.
    The long Gun registry would NOT have prevented that Marc L. did.
    However, better support to women and children in abusive relationships MIGHT have prevented what happened.
    It can prevent other tragedies that the registration of long guns will not prevent.

    BAD people, the kind that police go to and visit, do NOT register their guns

  10. anyone who compares gun registration to car registration should remember one simple fact: You don’t GO TO JAIL for having an unregistered car in your driveway. now that the long gun registry has been gone has long gun violence increased? no it’s done the exact opposite.

    • You do not need to register your car to own it, you need to register your car to drive it on a public road along with others who drive their cars. It is not a public safety measure, it’s a form of a tax.

Sign in to comment.