Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:


Peter Van Loan decided to not release this RCMP report on the gun registry…

..until after the vote last night, and for obvious reasons, as Susan Delacourt of the Star points out at her blog:

Less than 24 hours after the Commons voted in principle to scrap the long-gun registry, here’s the newly released performance report on the Canadian Firearms Centre. It’s spending less, attracting more registrants and police are using the registry  more — almost 4,000 times last year. Yep, that’s an argument to kill it.  Full report available if you click here..

…and here’s “public safety Minister” Peter Van Loan trying to lamely explain why he didn’t release it.. and the media aren’t impressed:

UPDATE: More police support of the registry comes out today as well, as noted by John Geddes of Macleans:

The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police put out a news release that makes the case—as they have many times—for the gun registry as a useful tool in police work. They offer examples. The registry helps police find out if guns are in homes where they are responding to domestic disputes. It helps them obtain warrants to seize guns from people who pose a threat. It helps police investigate when legally purchased rifles and shotguns are diverted into the black market.

I find it ironic that the Conservative Party and their supporters like to claim they are the only party of “law and order” – yet they’re willing for ideological and partisan reasons to take away a tool from the very police forces they claim to support. And, if you read certain blogsites, the police supporting the registry gets dismissed by some Conservative supporters because of some paranoid delusions of theirs that the police want to put gun-loving rural enthusiasts in jail or like spending taxpayers money, or some other bizarre reason.

My advice to the Liberals and NDP? Call the police chiefs to the committee studying this. Call the Dawson College students and the mothers and familes of the women slain at L’Ecole Polytechnique, and make sure all get very good publicity. It’s time to make those suburban Conservative MP’s sweat a little now.


14 comments to Peter Van Loan decided to not release this RCMP report on the gun registry…

  • Big Winnie

    Kmartin, that is exactly what they are…unable to say anything else other than the talking points. I have yet to hear how law abiding gun owners are being treated like criminals as per the talking points. Having read many a blog, the CONs have this habit of distorting the facts, blaming the liberals, trying to deflect the issue at hand, etc…that is why I have nothing but contempt for the CPC. If they were truly transparent, they would have relaeased all info, including the RCMP report, prior to the vote. However, it’s their nature to be secretive in all that they do. I wonder what they have to hide?

  • Big Winnie

    Is that all you CONBOTS can do is try to deflect attention from the issue at hand? ANSWER THE DAMN QUESTION OR IS IT THAT YOU KNOW YOU ARE WRONG AND HAVE TO TRY TO PUSH IT BACK ON THE LIBERALS!!! You people disgust me!!!

    • kmartin

      @Big Winnie, the conbot insult is one the things that make this blog look bad. You throw insults to the cons when backed into a corner instead of trying to reason and use real fact to back your point or to try to get your idea across. WInnie and Jon Pertwee are the worst offenders.

  • Greg

    Besides, $65.8 million is just too much

    Compared to what? Government advertising?

  • Big Winnie

    Jim, How much did Canada spend on Cancer research last year under this Conservative government? Moreover, instead of blaming the Liberals, which is the normal CON thing to do, the governemnt did absolutely NOTHING to obtain another supplier and they’ve had 4 years to do so!

    I digress but this is another CON strategy to deflect the issue. Van Loan should have made the report public prior to the vote. This is nothing more than “dirty politics”. I also agree that as a “private member’s bill”, the Cons certainly wasted alot of taxpayer money trying to get it passed and all it’s done is pitted rural vs. urban voters (another strategy used consistently by Harper).

    • kwittet

      @Big Winnie, Your points are about as valid as any other liberal. to quote your past mesiah chreitien the crook..whats a billion dollars? dont even quote dirty politics unless you can prove that your almighty liberals never engage in it.
      you say the con game is the blame game? this blog is supposed to be a liberal blog but it is sadly a hunting ground for conservatives. thank god the reader base is so small(minded as well..yes that inclused me) that the pissy little rants of the liberals on here including scott never hit main stream media.
      Now i have to go back to work and actually send some taxes into the feds so they can go spend it on stimulus that the libs forced on them while some sit in their basements doing nothing for society but blog.


      this place is so very something for your country instead of f**king bitching and complaining!!

      • Jon Pertwee

        @kwittet, “do something for your country instead of f**king b***hing and complaining!!” some good advice there for you too kwittet.

        • kmartin

          @Jon Pertwee, I have been lurking on this website for quite a while now and to a bit of a point i seen kwittet’s point. he seemed very angry and rightfully so. all i see is the libs on here picking every little thing that the conservatives do apart yet not one liberal supporter is offering anything solid on how to do it better. go ahead and attack my point. I AM A LIBERAL but at the rate we are trying to get a real leader and reading this so called grassroots blog sometimes i think the cons are better!

  • Why are folks screaming about ‘excessive’ registration costs then?

  • Mark – the registry *doesn’t* charge gun owners. It hasn’t for quite some time, which is one of the reasons why it costs taxpayers so much. And I don’t recall any intrusive details being asked on the firearms registration form. The PAL form is another matter – maybe that’s what you were thinking of.

  • Well, Jim, I read a lot more than that.

    That $65 million figure encompasses a lot more services than just having a registry. There’s training, education, and coordination with outside domestic and international agencies.

    People should just read what’s on the other side of Scott’s link.

    The registry shouldn’t be charging gun owners, nor should it be demanding so many intrusive details.

    Van Loan held it back because it hurts his case.

    I think the propaganda literature sent to key ridings spooked some MPs. Quite a lot of effort for a ‘private members’ bill.

  • Jim

    I believe the Liberal government of 2001 under Cretien paid GlaxoSmithKline something on the order of $360 million to be the single source supplier.

    Not that this has anything to do with the issue at hand.

    But thanks for playing.

  • CWTF

    Jim, how much did GSK get for the H1N1 contract?

  • Jim

    All I read in that is that it costs $65 million for the year and that there were 2895 more licences than the year prior…but that is licencing and has nothing to do with the registry.

    What happened the $3-5 million a year that Wendy Cukier and her minions are quoting as a per year cost.

    That report reads favourably in general of the Canada Firearms Centre and the licencing component, but I fail to see anything in there that makes the registry look like it is working in any demonstrable way.

    Besides, $65.8 million is just too much…how much did Canada spend on cancer research last year?

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.