Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:


The law and order party? More like the gun-lobby party

The Conservatives have once again delayed measures that get its core constituents in the gun lobby all hot and bothered – a slap in the face to both the police, and to international law:

The Harper government has once again delayed implementation of regulations that police say they need to quickly trace guns used in crimes…The regulations are supposed to bring Canada into compliance with international protocols requiring import marks on all firearms. The objective is to shorten the time it takes to trace guns that cross national borders as part of normal commercial transactions.

…Current laws state that all firearms must have a serial number, or firearms identification number, according to the ministry of public safety. The new regulations would require firearm manufacturers to include a marking that would indicate the origin of the firearm, and for imported firearms, the last two digits of the year it was imported.

This regulation has NOTHING to do with the long-gun registry, but the Conservatives have decided that pandering to the gun lobby is much better to their election prospects then aiding police or victims, or coming into line with international standards. The fact this is announced on the eve of and now the day of the anniversary of the Montreal Massacre shows again what a mockery it is for the Conservatives to be trying to claim they are the “law and order” party.


4 comments to The law and order party? More like the gun-lobby party

  • Redrum

    Yeah, I flagged this here last night, & wondered how/whether Fantino could possibly defend it, but that aside, here’s the core of my comment:

    The cops want it, obviously, to help curtail gun smuggling & black market gun sales & to speed up & broaden investigations; & the gun stores & manufacturers & criminals DON’T want it, obviously, so they can keep buying & selling & using unregistered guns with impunity (probably w. considerable mark-ups to ‘stay off the grid’); which leaves the gaping question: why in Hell WOULDN’T the gov’t want it?

    Sure, the extra serial no’s to be embossed may be an affront to & affect the resale value for the tiny minority of antique gun collectors, but there may be a way around that (e.g., to have the importers immediately register all the import data particulars this reg. wants w. whatever existing serial no’s there are, & to stay on the international database regardless of who acquires it next, or something), or maybe some exemptions can be made, but it shouldn’t be scrapped or delayed indefinitely just because of them, when the whole point of this is to try to figure out & put a stop to where the gangsters & gang-bangers are getting their guns from, which everybody, even the hunters & gun sportsmen professes to be in favour of…. except for the ones profitting from it, that is.

  • Gayle

    Yeah, but they increased the minimum sentences for gun crimes, so that will solve all our gun crime problems!

    Ha ha ha

    • TofKW

      @Gayle, love the sarcasm 🙂

      That’s the sad part of these no-nothing Reformatories, they employ simple solutions that crumble when reality hits.

      They think increased jail times will decrease crime. Sounds simple and effective right? Any sane person would be afraid of being in prison.

      Here’s the catch, normal people don’t commit crimes; at least not felonies that will land you in a penitentiary. Criminals are not ‘normal people’ and think only of there immediate situation and that they won’t get caught …which is why they commit crimes.

      As the USA is proving, increased sentences only increase the costs involved. Crime rates don’t decrease one iota.

      But hey, that’s what the experts and statistics say …what do they know?

      • Gayle

        @TofKW, I don’t think the politicians believe jail time will decrease crime. They just use it as a wedge issue because the know they can convince people it does even when they know it doesn’t. Works for the CPC because they also get to make the false claim the LPC are soft on crime just because the CPC increase minimun sentences.

        And yet, when it comes to truly substantive and society protecting crime legislation, the LPC clearly are the party tough on crime. I do not understand why they do not discuss their record.

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