Peter Stoffer > Edmund Burke. Just saying.

Peter Stoffer > Edmund Burke. Just saying.

What cabinet seat in the Iffy coalition of losers, is Stoffer positioning himself for?

ah, conservatives…

The law & order party (even when crime is trending down)… yet when it come to a choice between something approved by a majority of police departments in Canada, or an ideological act of vandalism that will appease part of their base… the CPC goes for the pander.

Layton has shown some great wisdom in not forcing his members to one side or the other. Of course you’d think Layton’s ‘whipping’, cos that’s how Harper operates.

Kind of nice to hear from an MP who considers the opinion of his constituents. Of course if Harper had considered the opinion of HIS constituency (…Canada), the vote to scrap the LGR wouldn’t be happening in the first place.

Obviously, Stoffer held that long time, “unshakeable” anti registry belief because of imput from his constituents. The same with the others that didn’t believe in this registry.

Someone on here once made reference to Occam’s Razor. Basically, Occam’s Razor is a theory that states that the simplest explanation is usually the right one. Now you tell me what explanation is more probable and uncomplicated – that contsituents in all of those rural ridings had a sudden and convenient change of heart? Or that Jack Layton is going back on his word and is whipping his caucus in secret because he didn’t want to bear the political embarrassment and liability of being responsible to his base for the collapse of the LGR due to letting his MPs vote freely?

It really isn’t that complicated.

Obviously, Stoffer held that long time, “unshakeable” anti registry belief because of imput from his constituents. The same with the others that didn’t believe in this registry.

Someone on here once made reference to Occam’s Razor. Basically, Occam’s Razor is a theory that states that the simplest explanation is usually the right one. Now you tell me what explanation is more probable and uncomplicated – that contsituents in all of those rural ridings had a sudden and convenient change of heart? Or that Jack Layton is going back on his word and is whipping his caucus in secret because he didn’t want to bear the political embarrassment and liability of being responsible to his base for the collapse of the LGR due to letting his MPs vote freely?

It really isn’t that complicated.

‘Kind of nice to hear from an MP who considers the opinion of his constituents’

especially when Stoffer now admits he was ignoring ‘the opinion of his constituents’ until now, and killing the LGR was his ‘personal’ position.

Of course, that’s a load of ….,
just like the other Dippers flip flopping because of the NRA involvement in a brochure 10 years ago,
or because the CPC pointed out that literally thousands of guns have been confiscated (as Allan Rock wanted) due to irregular paper work.

Yah ain’t foolin’ us Sun media readers sport!

If you take a look at what NDP seats are in jeopardy (Jack and Olivia) needed to whip his 12 MPs to save a few Toronto-Northern Ontario seats?

Will they abandon their single Alberta seat for their only Quebec seat? You betcha!

Did Jack fear a hard fight for his wife and own seat in downtown Toronto? Are those whipped MPs safe seats with large margins? Are 50% of the flip flopped MP recent gains against Liberals in 2008?

Looks like Jack doesn’t care about presiding over a smaller crew of MP’s as long as he and Olivia please their base of support in Tronna.

The rural riding in my neck of the woods is resoundingly Conservative after decades of Liberal rule thanks to the Liberal Gun Registry. Rural folks are fed up with their lives being interfered with, being treated like irresponsible people. The same thing will happen to the NDP and Liberals who defy their constituents on this one.

Something fishy going on with the Dippers on this one. Ignatieff has goofed as well. Should look good on them.

Sixty-one percent of Stoffer’s constituents are for keeping the long gun registry. Turn Occam’s shaving utensil loose on that maybe. It really isn’t that complicated.

The new leader of the federal NDP , Mark Holland , seems to have more control over the ND’s than Michael Ignatieff thas over the liberals .

That was before he flip flopped, now Stoffer will hear from the other half of his constituents.

That was before he flip flopped, now Stoffer will hear from the other half of his constituents.

Stoffer sold out for something that is for sure, but what? (real conservative)

Half?

Wilson, I think maybe math is not your strong point.

Hey. Here is a tought. Maybe the majority of his constituents support the gun registry. I mean, it is cute and all the way you guys just make stuff up about why he changed his vote, but sometimes people are just telling the truth.

You guys never seem to understand that your views are not representative of the majority of this country.

Take heart though. I am quite certain Harper is happy his precious bill (which he “cleverly” disguised as a PMB) is about to fail. Now he can use this issue to once again rally the troops to donate their hard earned dollars. You guys must see how the failure of this bill helps Harper. If the gun registry was disbanded, the LPC stood to pick up votes from the NDP. Now it is business as usual. Do you really think Harper wanted anything else to happen?

You guys must see how the failure of this bill helps Harper

Bingo.

The long gun registry will remain potent in Harper’s arsenal of insignificant but divisive wedge issues.

Oh, you’re reduced to the wedgies now? Fitting I must say.

Peter Stoffer is solid in his riding, has been AGAINST the gun registry all along and now suddenly has had a change of mind and you guys think his constituents have also changed their minds?
He must have on hell of a spell on them, is all I can figure. It’s not the case in any rural riding in these parts, if the MP’s change their tune, vote to keep the GR, they’d be toast next election.

You can’t call it “creating a wedge issue,” the divide has always been there, nothing new at all.

You might want to go do a bit of thinking as to what’s happening in Toronto right now. There’s a big change in mindset there, folks are fed up and waking up. So keep on with the smug rhetoric, your getting down to the last refuges.

The bill may fail and those who cause it to fail will be the big losers, they’re giving themselves a wedgie.

Oh, you’re reduced to the wedgies now? Fitting I must say.

Peter Stoffer is solid in his riding, has been AGAINST the gun registry all along and now suddenly has had a change of mind and you guys think his constituents have also changed their minds?
He must have on hell of a spell on them, is all I can figure. It’s not the case in any rural riding in these parts, if the MP’s change their tune, vote to keep the GR, they’d be toast next election.

You can’t call it “creating a wedge issue,” the divide has always been there, nothing new at all.

You might want to go do a bit of thinking as to what’s happening in Toronto right now. There’s a big change in mindset there, folks are fed up and waking up. So keep on with the smug rhetoric, your getting down to the last refuges.

The bill may fail and those who cause it to fail will be the big losers, they’re giving themselves a wedgie.

1. For years we have been hearing nothing about how the registry is an expensive boondoggle. only recently have we heard it is neither, and that the police believe it to be a useful tool to investigate crime. Of course hearing both sides of an issue will cause some people to change their minds. Not everyone is so closed minded that they discount an opposing view without even hearing it.

2. Until recently the gun registry was not even on the radar for most people. Stoffer may have only heard from people against it because they were the ones fighting the status quo. Now that that status quo is threatened the supporters are speaking up.

The wedge issue has indeed been around for a long time – created by the Reform Party.

1. For years we have been hearing nothing about how the registry is an expensive boondoggle. only recently have we heard it is neither, and that the police believe it to be a useful tool to investigate crime. Of course hearing both sides of an issue will cause some people to change their minds. Not everyone is so closed minded that they discount an opposing view without even hearing it.

2. Until recently the gun registry was not even on the radar for most people. Stoffer may have only heard from people against it because they were the ones fighting the status quo. Now that that status quo is threatened the supporters are speaking up.

The wedge issue has indeed been around for a long time – created by the Reform Party.

The Gun Registry has been on the radar of those affected by it, maybe not on the media radar who tend to ignore Liberal boondoggles of any stripe.

The rank and file cops on the beat are not for it, it’s the Chiefs of police who are, it’s all about the politics of the elite. Anyone who thinks another level of registration will somehow make us all safer is not thinking beyond the politics of it.

Speaking of close minded, perhaps we could call it a stalemate, let the people decide at the next election.

Your reference to the Reform party, which no longer exists is an example of desperation. The Reform party didn’t change the urban/rural demographic, the divide was always there on this issue.

The Gun Registry has been on the radar of those affected by it, maybe not on the media radar who tend to ignore Liberal boondoggles of any stripe.

The rank and file cops on the beat are not for it, it’s the Chiefs of police who are, it’s all about the politics of the elite. Anyone who thinks another level of registration will somehow make us all safer is not thinking beyond the politics of it.

Speaking of close minded, perhaps we could call it a stalemate, let the people decide at the next election.

Your reference to the Reform party, which no longer exists is an example of desperation. The Reform party didn’t change the urban/rural demographic, the divide was always there on this issue.

1. The media have been reporting the CPC line about a boondoggle for years. Closing your eyes and ignoring what is right in front of you does not make you persuasive.

2. You have absolutely no evidence to support your suggestion the rank and file are not in favour of the registry. Just pure wishful thinking on your part.

3. The current conservative party sprang from the former reform party (I amsurprised you do not know this). The registry has been a wedge issue ever since the Reform party made it so.

1. The media have been reporting the CPC line about a boondoggle for years. Closing your eyes and ignoring what is right in front of you does not make you persuasive.

2. You have absolutely no evidence to support your suggestion the rank and file are not in favour of the registry. Just pure wishful thinking on your part.

3. The current conservative party sprang from the former reform party (I amsurprised you do not know this). The registry has been a wedge issue ever since the Reform party made it so.

1. The media have been reporting the CPC line about a boondoggle for years. Closing your eyes and ignoring what is right in front of you does not make you persuasive.

2. You have absolutely no evidence to support your suggestion the rank and file are not in favour of the registry. Just pure wishful thinking on your part.

3. The current conservative party sprang from the former reform party (I amsurprised you do not know this). The registry has been a wedge issue ever since the Reform party made it so.

So what?

So what?

According to Liberals, Democrats and Bloc on mandatory polls with fines and threat of jail are valid. Sorry nice try.

Stoffer is not Bill Casey or John Nunziata.

The auditor general raised the red flags about the LGR. Government waste exists this is a liberal boondoggle. Original estimates $ 2 million skyrocketed to $ 2 billion. Annual savings after moved is currently $ 4 million.The Liberal myth is suggesting it only costs $ 4 million to run.So we have a program annual cost $ 50-100 million that does NOT save lives is not supported by the front line police officers and Liberals bring out women’s group crying uncle.Yes desperate times for a desperate party. The Peter Stoffer excuse of 62% of 3,000 people is his non-scientific poll. Similar polls show 44% in favour of scrapping it. No gender or rural divide.Online polls show over 70% for scrapping it.So the Regina weekend has had Peter flip flop on his promises for 13 years to scrap this useless Liberal policy that has consumed $ 2 billion dollars of taxpayers money!Every year it will consume another $50 million+ for a deeply flawed database that is not trusted by front line officers.

The NDP vote is not whipped, sorry to disappoint you folks. As to saving NDP seats, I think jack has done a good job for urban and rural seats.

The NDP vote is not whipped, sorry to disappoint you folks. As to saving NDP seats, I think jack has done a good job for urban and rural seats.

I do have first hand evidence, something you wouldn’t know of course and I’m not going to bother to even waste my time trying to break your state of denial, I simply don’t care.

The current Conservative party “sprung” from the Reform Party, sure, what about it? I’m proud of it, make no apologies for supporting the Reform Party, Conservative to the core. Without the Reform party we wouldn’t have the best administration and the best PM we’ve had in memory. That’s what’s sticking in your craw, give us a few more hack-ups if it will make you feel better.

The wedge issue is yours to enjoy as long as you wish, it’s something to yak about, putting a name on a crock of crap, it’s not going to make it a fact. The folks who are having their lives interfered with unduly, who are being treated as criminals who can’t be trusted, aren’t talking about wedgies, they’re simply fed up, the Liberals and Dippers will know in due course just how fed up they are

I do have first hand evidence, something you wouldn’t know of course and I’m not going to bother to even waste my time trying to break your state of denial, I simply don’t care.

The current Conservative party “sprung” from the Reform Party, sure, what about it? I’m proud of it, make no apologies for supporting the Reform Party, Conservative to the core. Without the Reform party we wouldn’t have the best administration and the best PM we’ve had in memory. That’s what’s sticking in your craw, give us a few more hack-ups if it will make you feel better.

The wedge issue is yours to enjoy as long as you wish, it’s something to yak about, putting a name on a crock of crap, it’s not going to make it a fact. The folks who are having their lives interfered with unduly, who are being treated as criminals who can’t be trusted, aren’t talking about wedgies, they’re simply fed up, the Liberals and Dippers will know in due course just how fed up they are

Gayle said: “You have absolutely no evidence to support your suggestion the rank and file are not in favour of the registry. Just pure wishful thinking on your part. ”

Here’s some proof from the RCMP report http://www.scribd.com/doc/36633614/En-Firearms-Evaluation-Report
“In a call for service or investigation, general duty police officer safety is increased by knowing if firearms are associated to a person or residence. There are, however, mixed feelings from police officers about the Firearm Registry. Some say ‘any tool is better than no tool’ and others ‘they always presume there is a firearm present, so therefore the Registry is irrelevant’. Before entering a dwelling some officers therefore, might not use the registry. The perception that the registry contains incomplete information was cause for concern among some officers interviewed, who felt they could not depend on the registry to give them an accurate insight as to whether or not there were firearms present in a dwelling. This is due to the issue that firearms may not have been registered by a firearm user, or for instance, if a firearm was procured specifically to undertake illegal activities. …”

Gayle said: “You have absolutely no evidence to support your suggestion the rank and file are not in favour of the registry. Just pure wishful thinking on your part. ”

Here’s some proof from the RCMP report http://www.scribd.com/doc/36633614/En-Firearms-Evaluation-Report
“In a call for service or investigation, general duty police officer safety is increased by knowing if firearms are associated to a person or residence. There are, however, mixed feelings from police officers about the Firearm Registry. Some say ‘any tool is better than no tool’ and others ‘they always presume there is a firearm present, so therefore the Registry is irrelevant’. Before entering a dwelling some officers therefore, might not use the registry. The perception that the registry contains incomplete information was cause for concern among some officers interviewed, who felt they could not depend on the registry to give them an accurate insight as to whether or not there were firearms present in a dwelling. This is due to the issue that firearms may not have been registered by a firearm user, or for instance, if a firearm was procured specifically to undertake illegal activities. …”

We have a duplicate situation to Stoffers, on the West Coast with Liberal MP Keith Martin. His riding (in which I live) is strongly opposed to the Long Gun Registry. I have listened to him for 15 years be very supportive of long gun owners which gained him a lot of votes. Historically, he has always opposed the Registry and has twice voted for it to be repealed in the H of C. Now, he too, has also caught the “shotgun flu” and will vote to support the registry. He denies this has anything to do with Ignatieff’s “whipped vote”. Again, you can call it “optics” if you like, but most of us see it for what it is. It will cost him his seat — I 99% guarantee it.

The Gun Registry was introduced in 1995 by then Liberal Justice Minister Allan Rock, under the Chretien Liberals, Gayle. Those of us who have followed it for 15 years are well-informed. As Liz J says, it has ALWAYS been a wedge issue since its inception. The Conservatives have NEVER changed their opposition to it. What was to be a 2 million dollar program ballooned into 2 billion. Page 55 of the RCMP report indicates that the budget for 2010 – 2011 is estimated at 76 million dollars. The media misinformation is that it will only cost 4 million to maintain the useless registry, which targets only legal gun owners. The 4 million is the COST SAVINGS by having the RCMP manage this file. IT IS NOT THE COST OF THE PROGRAM. What the Registry does allow is for the police to confiscate long guns (without a warrant to seize private property in the absence of a crime) if the gun owner does not keep his license or registration up to date. What the Registry does do is siphon off tax-payer dollars which could be used to give the police more effective tools in their fight against criminals and violent offenders.
As for evidence — Ed KUNTZ, an Edmonton police Chief, conducted a survey through an on-line police magazine and received 2600 responses regarding the Long Gun Registry. Well over 2400 police officers were in favour of scrapping it. I won’t provide the link. You are welcome to google it, but that would be assuming you actually want to be informed rather than rely on Liberal/NDP/Bloc talking points. Thought I would pass this next “close your eyes and ignore what is right in front of you” comment for your consideration:
Sharon Carstairs

“C-68 has little to do with gun control or crime control, but it is the first step necessary to begin the social re-engineering of Canada.”

— Quote by Senator Sharon Carstairs (Liberal) 1996 January 26 – 11th Annual Community Legal Education Associations (CLEA) Conference, Winnipeg, Manitoba

1. No, you do not have first hand evidence the majority of the rank and file support abolishing the registry. The very fact you refuse to provide your “evidence” is proof of that. So very, very weak Liz.

2. You cannot whine about referring to the Reform party if you also acknowledge the currect conservative party has its roots in the Reform party movement. Well, at least not if you do not want to be a hypocrite. Since I have noticed in the past you could not care less about being a hypocrite I am certain you see nothing wrong with the contradictory position you have taken here. However, that will not prevent me from pointing it out.

3. As for the rest -yawn.

1. No, you do not have first hand evidence the majority of the rank and file support abolishing the registry. The very fact you refuse to provide your “evidence” is proof of that. So very, very weak Liz.

2. You cannot whine about referring to the Reform party if you also acknowledge the currect conservative party has its roots in the Reform party movement. Well, at least not if you do not want to be a hypocrite. Since I have noticed in the past you could not care less about being a hypocrite I am certain you see nothing wrong with the contradictory position you have taken here. However, that will not prevent me from pointing it out.

3. As for the rest -yawn.

Hmmm. For someone who seems to be as literate as you, it is a wonder how you think that quote actually supports the notion the majority of the rank and file do not support the registry.

Maybe reread it and try again.

I’m sorry. I think you are the one who needs to google that little “survey’ you refer to. When you do I am sure you will discover it is utterly unreliable and unscientific, and its release forced the publisher of the “Blue Line” to come out against it, AND the bill to dismantle the gun registry.

See, when I said “evidence”, I meant evidence, not wishful thinking.

So are you suggesting you voted for him? Do you know a lot of people who voted for him on the basis of his opposition to the long gun registry?

“How many car accidents have been prevented because a car was registred, just asking.”

Wrong question. Ask how many hit and runs have been solved because the car was registered.

This is Canada, you don’t decide the questions.

A fascist at heart dear?

This is Canada, you don’t decide the questions.

A fascist at heart dear?

This is Canada, you don’t decide the questions.

A fascist at heart dear?

That weekend in Regina, the long public record of opposition to the useless Liberal boondoggle just a coincidence?

Nice try, the bowed head, ashamed to look constituents in the eye, fictional straw poll of 3,000 people over the weekend? (1860/3000 people called him to save it?) Can you link that evidence exists?

As Sheila Copps about it, she had the courage to resign and get re-elected.

Casey and Nunziata withstood the whip, looks like the hope for a coalition cabinet post or appointment to a senate in the coalition in 2011 is now a fair comment.

or is it possible the leadership in Toronto is threatened and a loss of seats in downtown, Northern Ontario was made known through internal polling to key NDP MPs?

That weekend in Regina, the long public record of opposition to the useless Liberal boondoggle just a coincidence?

Nice try, the bowed head, ashamed to look constituents in the eye, fictional straw poll of 3,000 people over the weekend? (1860/3000 people called him to save it?) Can you link that evidence exists?

As Sheila Copps about it, she had the courage to resign and get re-elected.

Casey and Nunziata withstood the whip, looks like the hope for a coalition cabinet post or appointment to a senate in the coalition in 2011 is now a fair comment.

or is it possible the leadership in Toronto is threatened and a loss of seats in downtown, Northern Ontario was made known through internal polling to key NDP MPs?

That weekend in Regina, the long public record of opposition to the useless Liberal boondoggle just a coincidence?

Nice try, the bowed head, ashamed to look constituents in the eye, fictional straw poll of 3,000 people over the weekend? (1860/3000 people called him to save it?) Can you link that evidence exists?

As Sheila Copps about it, she had the courage to resign and get re-elected.

Casey and Nunziata withstood the whip, looks like the hope for a coalition cabinet post or appointment to a senate in the coalition in 2011 is now a fair comment.

or is it possible the leadership in Toronto is threatened and a loss of seats in downtown, Northern Ontario was made known through internal polling to key NDP MPs?

EPIC FAIL.NANOS poll does not support your Liberal world view. The mafia theme ties nicely to the Liberal party, thank you for pissing off the Italian community and suggesting corruption and murder is acceptable humour in Canadian politics.The braintrust in the LPOC are running on empty calling us chubby chasers and denying the tax and spend record.Democracy is something Liberals don’t understand or accept.Ignatieff benefited from a female, a visible minority stepping aside in a safe seat?Ignatieff was able to secure the nomination through candidates being locked out in the safe seat?Police were on duty to prevent violence for his acceptance.A small cadre of Liberals repeated the hi jacking of the party in 2008 to prevent another democratic contest between Rae, Leblanc and Ignatieff?Clearly democracy has been extinguished in the Liberals for years and the Rob Ford phenomena is not understand in the Bay Street boys club.

EPIC FAIL.NANOS poll does not support your Liberal world view. The mafia theme ties nicely to the Liberal party, thank you for pissing off the Italian community and suggesting corruption and murder is acceptable humour in Canadian politics.The braintrust in the LPOC are running on empty calling us chubby chasers and denying the tax and spend record.Democracy is something Liberals don’t understand or accept.Ignatieff benefited from a female, a visible minority stepping aside in a safe seat?Ignatieff was able to secure the nomination through candidates being locked out in the safe seat?Police were on duty to prevent violence for his acceptance.A small cadre of Liberals repeated the hi jacking of the party in 2008 to prevent another democratic contest between Rae, Leblanc and Ignatieff?Clearly democracy has been extinguished in the Liberals for years and the Rob Ford phenomena is not understand in the Bay Street boys club.

EPIC FAIL.NANOS poll does not support your Liberal world view. The mafia theme ties nicely to the Liberal party, thank you for pissing off the Italian community and suggesting corruption and murder is acceptable humour in Canadian politics.The braintrust in the LPOC are running on empty calling us chubby chasers and denying the tax and spend record.Democracy is something Liberals don’t understand or accept.Ignatieff benefited from a female, a visible minority stepping aside in a safe seat?Ignatieff was able to secure the nomination through candidates being locked out in the safe seat?Police were on duty to prevent violence for his acceptance.A small cadre of Liberals repeated the hi jacking of the party in 2008 to prevent another democratic contest between Rae, Leblanc and Ignatieff?Clearly democracy has been extinguished in the Liberals for years and the Rob Ford phenomena is not understand in the Bay Street boys club.

Yes, Gayle. I have voted for Keith in the past, before I realized that he is not the principled guy that he makes himself out to be. In one example out of many, I called him out for taking credit for a Senior’s facility expansion that he had nothing to do with, and he bald-faced lied about it on local radio. Yes, I know of several hundred people who specifically voted for Keith on the basis of his previous position on the Long Gun Registry. There are many active clubs such as the B.C. Wildlife Federation, the Angler’s Club, the Malahat Gun Club and many others in his riding who strongly support the abolition of the Registry. This riding is a coastal one where there is a very active group known as the South Vancouver Island Rangers. They are a group of civilians who have a long history of protecting our coastline with a membership of over 250. For 15 years, (Keith has been an MP for 17 years) he held many talks with the aforementioned groups, supporting long gun owners and advocating for the abolition of the Registry. So, like Stoffer, the reasons offered for their change in position remain highly suspect. The response in our local papers to Keith’s announcement has been significant and 90% of those responses have not been kind to Keith. His excuse that the “police want it” makes no sense. It is well established that over 40% of the registry is inaccurate, so it is not a reliable tool for the police to use. Knives and illegal hand guns are used far more often than long guns. The police know it and we know it.

Yes, Gayle. I have voted for Keith in the past, before I realized that he is not the principled guy that he makes himself out to be. In one example out of many, I called him out for taking credit for a Senior’s facility expansion that he had nothing to do with, and he bald-faced lied about it on local radio. Yes, I know of several hundred people who specifically voted for Keith on the basis of his previous position on the Long Gun Registry. There are many active clubs such as the B.C. Wildlife Federation, the Angler’s Club, the Malahat Gun Club and many others in his riding who strongly support the abolition of the Registry. This riding is a coastal one where there is a very active group known as the South Vancouver Island Rangers. They are a group of civilians who have a long history of protecting our coastline with a membership of over 250. For 15 years, (Keith has been an MP for 17 years) he held many talks with the aforementioned groups, supporting long gun owners and advocating for the abolition of the Registry. So, like Stoffer, the reasons offered for their change in position remain highly suspect. The response in our local papers to Keith’s announcement has been significant and 90% of those responses have not been kind to Keith. His excuse that the “police want it” makes no sense. It is well established that over 40% of the registry is inaccurate, so it is not a reliable tool for the police to use. Knives and illegal hand guns are used far more often than long guns. The police know it and we know it.

Yes, Gayle. I have voted for Keith in the past, before I realized that he is not the principled guy that he makes himself out to be. In one example out of many, I called him out for taking credit for a Senior’s facility expansion that he had nothing to do with, and he bald-faced lied about it on local radio. Yes, I know of several hundred people who specifically voted for Keith on the basis of his previous position on the Long Gun Registry. There are many active clubs such as the B.C. Wildlife Federation, the Angler’s Club, the Malahat Gun Club and many others in his riding who strongly support the abolition of the Registry. This riding is a coastal one where there is a very active group known as the South Vancouver Island Rangers. They are a group of civilians who have a long history of protecting our coastline with a membership of over 250. For 15 years, (Keith has been an MP for 17 years) he held many talks with the aforementioned groups, supporting long gun owners and advocating for the abolition of the Registry. So, like Stoffer, the reasons offered for their change in position remain highly suspect. The response in our local papers to Keith’s announcement has been significant and 90% of those responses have not been kind to Keith. His excuse that the “police want it” makes no sense. It is well established that over 40% of the registry is inaccurate, so it is not a reliable tool for the police to use. Knives and illegal hand guns are used far more often than long guns. The police know it and we know it.

And Stoffer’s survey should be taken seriously? Of interest, in talking with Candace Hoeppner, the author of Bill 391 to remove long guns from the Registry, she reported that since last year she has had NO negative responses from front-line police officers about this bill. She has had, however, several hundred positive responses from police officers to scrap the registry. They have also requested anonymity in order to protect their jobs.
I am not at all surprised that the publisher of Blue Line was forced to recant, but that doesn’t change Ed Kuntz’s position (the author of the survey). As they say, follow the money.

When cops answer a call to a disturbance, domestic or whatever, they always assume there is a gun involved and act accordingly. This isn’t my pipe dream, it comes from a retired police officer friend and the same from a family member who was District Superintendent in the police force.

If a gun is registered to a specific person at a specific address and gets stolen, the place that gun ends up, perhaps at another residence where there’s threat of violence and the police are called, and that residence had no registered gun, how would the registry help in this scenario?

When cops answer a call to a disturbance, domestic or whatever, they always assume there is a gun involved and act accordingly. This isn’t my pipe dream, it comes from a retired police officer friend and the same from a family member who was District Superintendent in the police force.

If a gun is registered to a specific person at a specific address and gets stolen, the place that gun ends up, perhaps at another residence where there’s threat of violence and the police are called, and that residence had no registered gun, how would the registry help in this scenario?

When cops answer a call to a disturbance, domestic or whatever, they always assume there is a gun involved and act accordingly. This isn’t my pipe dream, it comes from a retired police officer friend and the same from a family member who was District Superintendent in the police force.

If a gun is registered to a specific person at a specific address and gets stolen, the place that gun ends up, perhaps at another residence where there’s threat of violence and the police are called, and that residence had no registered gun, how would the registry help in this scenario?

The perception that the registry contains incomplete information was cause for concern among some officers interviewed, who felt they could not depend on the registry to give them an accurate insight as to whether or not there were firearms present in a dwelling.

If the registry is incomplete, its due in large part to the CPC’s constant efforts to discredit it, simply so that they can keep it alive as a wedge issue.

EPIC FAIL.

You’re Epic Lame. Time for a new catch-phrase, maybe?

The mafia theme ties nicely to the Liberal party, thank you for pissing off the Italian community and suggesting corruption and murder is acceptable humour in Canadian politics.

WTF are you smoking? Where have I mentioned ANY of that? If you’re referring to something else, FFS provide the reference.

Your internet licence needs to be revoked. It’s not like you use it to learn anything.

CanadianDense, indeed.

“Maybe reread it and try again.”
Same old, same old, Gayle.

The quote from the RCMP report — which you have probably not read — may not state “a majority” of the rank & file supports the registry.

But the quote DOES counter your assertion: “You have absolutely no evidence to support your suggestion the rank and file are not in favour of the registry.”

QED.

Regardless, if the LGR is saved tomorrow there is going to be a suicide or other murder by said long gun and the opposition will have to explain why it happened, the LGR would prevent suicides and murders and other mayhem. The police chiefs will have to take the blame cause they say the registry prevents such things. The first policeman killed can be blamed on the opposition and police chiefs.

That’s insane. No-one’s claiming the LGR will completely end any long-gun killings. It is most effective for knowing whether a legally owned gun may be present when officers are responding to a domestic violence call, or family/neighbourhood dispute, or someone’s suicidal or deranged. These sorts of calls are much more common than the gang/criminal scenarios that LGR opponents keep bringing up, and knowing in advance that a registered gun is on the premises can make a big difference in how to approach a situation.

I’d say that the CPC have to answer for their actions that have encouraged people to NOT register their weapons. If someone is shot by a legally-owned weapon that wasn’t registered, so law enforcement wouldn’t know about it, the blood will be on your hands.

Of course the police must be prepared for anything. But knowing is still better than assuming.

If a gun is registered to a specific person at a specific address and gets stolen, the place that gun ends up, perhaps at another residence where there’s threat of violence and the police are called, and that residence had no registered gun, how would the registry help in this scenario?

We can play scenarios all day. (or not). The fact remains that the “stolen” long-gun scenario is less common than the situations where a registered long gun may be present.

Do you have any proof the auditor general Sheila Fraser is a CPC operative and her incomplete audit was fake?

My theory is Liberal apologists are very upset people don’t rely on the Toronto Star or the CBC for facts anymore. The result is the myths and lies can’t stand up to commonsense.

As the default Liberal apologist citing the Toronto Star, CBC, Warren Kinsella and Glen Pearson for your talking points where are you going to get rely on non-partisan material?

You deny the Nanos Poll findings support everywhere including DOWNTOWN. You than take up the mantle and invoke Tea Party as Democrats have done as “astro turf”.

You may find the Mafia humour with Italians appropriate, some Liberals strategist also think it was a good decision.

My prediction another 2% drop for the Smitherman and Rossi at the ballot if they last.

The culture of entitlement is terrified.

Go play in traffic.

Go play in traffic.

Liberal thuggery on display?

Interning Japanese, Italians, German, rounding up Quebecers during October Crisis, APEC Quebec City, pepper spraying students and media at UBC, rounding up 1100 protesters in Toronto this summer Liberals have a difficult time with the application of law and order.

Arar, Khadr both under the Liberal watch.

As an apologist for a dying political party I understand why you are so angry. Like the Reform, PC, Liberal banner has become obsolete.

Best of luck with integrating the Bay Street boys club in the new coalition with Jack-Duceppe-May.

Liberal thuggery on display?

Interning Japanese, Italians, German, rounding up Quebecers during October Crisis, APEC Quebec City, pepper spraying students and media at UBC, rounding up 1100 protesters in Toronto this summer Liberals have a difficult time with the application of law and order.

Arar, Khadr both under the Liberal watch.

As an apologist for a dying political party I understand why you are so angry. Like the Reform, PC, Liberal banner has become obsolete.

Best of luck with integrating the Bay Street boys club in the new coalition with Jack-Duceppe-May.

Liberal thuggery on display?

Interning Japanese, Italians, German, rounding up Quebecers during October Crisis, APEC Quebec City, pepper spraying students and media at UBC, rounding up 1100 protesters in Toronto this summer Liberals have a difficult time with the application of law and order.

Arar, Khadr both under the Liberal watch.

As an apologist for a dying political party I understand why you are so angry. Like the Reform, PC, Liberal banner has become obsolete.

Best of luck with integrating the Bay Street boys club in the new coalition with Jack-Duceppe-May.

Keep digging.

It’s worth noting all the major newspapers are not on side with Iggy, Jack and Gilles, the coalition troika from Hell.

It’s worth noting all the major newspapers are not on side with Iggy, Jack and GillesOMG. Does this mean that the MSM is no longer biased? Should we order a cake? It was a full moon last night…

No. It doesn’t.

It says some people have reservations about it’s usefulness in all circumstances. That is not the same thing as saying they do not support maintaining the registry.

(and yes, I have read the report).

No. It doesn’t.

It says some people have reservations about it’s usefulness in all circumstances. That is not the same thing as saying they do not support maintaining the registry.

(and yes, I have read the report).

“And Stoffer’s survey should be taken seriously?”

Who said that? He explained why he has taken the position he has. Some people here are suggesting he is lying. I am not.

I could not care less about what Hoeppner says the police think. I care about what the police say the police think.

“And Stoffer’s survey should be taken seriously?”

Who said that? He explained why he has taken the position he has. Some people here are suggesting he is lying. I am not.

I could not care less about what Hoeppner says the police think. I care about what the police say the police think.

I guess we shall see then, but I must say I question your knowledge of people who vote for him and why. I cannot help but notice you do not vote for him.

I believe that most people whose vote is based on the registry already have abandonned the liberals. In his case he may lose because of this vote, but I doubt there will be any more liberals who do so.

I guess we shall see then, but I must say I question your knowledge of people who vote for him and why. I cannot help but notice you do not vote for him.

I believe that most people whose vote is based on the registry already have abandonned the liberals. In his case he may lose because of this vote, but I doubt there will be any more liberals who do so.

Ha ha ha

Your attempts to change the subject and launch into a personal attack are just so obvious.

Keep it up though. When I need a laugh I always know where I can find you.

Ha ha ha

Your attempts to change the subject and launch into a personal attack are just so obvious.

Keep it up though. When I need a laugh I always know where I can find you.

“and yes, I have read the report”

If you had really read it, you wouldn’t have made the categorical statement you made earlier, to wit:
“2. You have absolutely no evidence to support your suggestion the rank and file are not in favour of the registry. Just pure wishful thinking on your part. ”

You then changed your tune to:
“1. No, you do not have first hand evidence the majority of the rank and file support abolishing the registry. The very fact you refuse to provide your “evidence” is proof of that. So very, very weak Liz.”
When was that? Four hours AFTER I quoted a passage from the RCMP report to counter your initial statement.

Good job, Gayle, the master prevaricator.

“and yes, I have read the report”

If you had really read it, you wouldn’t have made the categorical statement you made earlier, to wit:
“2. You have absolutely no evidence to support your suggestion the rank and file are not in favour of the registry. Just pure wishful thinking on your part. ”

You then changed your tune to:
“1. No, you do not have first hand evidence the majority of the rank and file support abolishing the registry. The very fact you refuse to provide your “evidence” is proof of that. So very, very weak Liz.”
When was that? Four hours AFTER I quoted a passage from the RCMP report to counter your initial statement.

Good job, Gayle, the master prevaricator.

What is the matter with this site?
Is there a time limit to the composition of a reply?
Is there a limit to how many replies one can post at a given time?

One of my replies has been “rejected” time and again with this kind of verbiage:
“bad JSON: {“method”: “postComment.onFailure”, “params”: [{“message”: “Get thee some captcha”, “code”: “captcha-required”, “succeeded”: false, “request”: {“post”: {“message”:

Something odd for sure, Gabby. Perhaps we better move on outta here.

LGR lives to fight another election (shoving aside real issues)

Web mechanics. Anyways, it seems to have been fixed.

What are the ages of the NDP who voted against the gun registry? Are their pensions safe?

What are the ages of the NDP who voted against the gun registry? Are their pensions safe?

Gabby, Gabby, Gabby.

Clearly you had some trouble understanding this the first time around. Let me try again.

The quote you provide demonstrates that some officers are uncertain the registry is useful for some things. While I understand your tendance to take some words and pretend they mean something totally different, it simply is not the case here.

There is NO evidence the rank and file do not support the registry.

Now, since you have quickly reverted to your tiresome habit of pretending one word means something totally different, I will end this little discussion.

Do have a nice day.

Linda Duncan from AB is a second term ndp mp-her first and last. No pension.

solving a crime is done after the fact, not before the fact. And the registry is accessed after an assault or dispute, not before, so it does not prevent anything. And then, only if the assault or dispute is reported to police. The registry does not prevent anything.
There is no way of knowing when they stop a car for whatever, if the driver of the car is the registered owner, or if a passenger is there, or if said passenger has a gun.
So, every time they stop someone or are called somewhere they must be prepared that there could be a gun there.

solving a crime is done after the fact, not before the fact. And the registry is accessed after an assault or dispute, not before, so it does not prevent anything. And then, only if the assault or dispute is reported to police. The registry does not prevent anything.
There is no way of knowing when they stop a car for whatever, if the driver of the car is the registered owner, or if a passenger is there, or if said passenger has a gun.
So, every time they stop someone or are called somewhere they must be prepared that there could be a gun there.

solving a crime is done after the fact, not before the fact. And the registry is accessed after an assault or dispute, not before, so it does not prevent anything. And then, only if the assault or dispute is reported to police. The registry does not prevent anything.
There is no way of knowing when they stop a car for whatever, if the driver of the car is the registered owner, or if a passenger is there, or if said passenger has a gun.
So, every time they stop someone or are called somewhere they must be prepared that there could be a gun there.

Not whipped, but a lot of arms were twisted, it is all in the wording. Layton whipped his caucus and still some voted against him. And kiss Linda Duncan good bye next election, poor thing will get no pension.
Did you catch the question of the day on Power and Politics, willopposition seats be lost due to todays vote.
Question of the Day

* September 22, 2010 3:16 PM | Comments83Recommend8
* By Ryan Hicks

Thank you for voting!
Yes 62.98% (958 votes)
No 34.45% (524 votes)
Unsure 2.56% (39 votes)
Total Votes: 1,521

Not whipped, but a lot of arms were twisted, it is all in the wording. Layton whipped his caucus and still some voted against him. And kiss Linda Duncan good bye next election, poor thing will get no pension.
Did you catch the question of the day on Power and Politics, willopposition seats be lost due to todays vote.
Question of the Day

* September 22, 2010 3:16 PM | Comments83Recommend8
* By Ryan Hicks

Thank you for voting!
Yes 62.98% (958 votes)
No 34.45% (524 votes)
Unsure 2.56% (39 votes)
Total Votes: 1,521

Not whipped, but a lot of arms were twisted, it is all in the wording. Layton whipped his caucus and still some voted against him. And kiss Linda Duncan good bye next election, poor thing will get no pension.
Did you catch the question of the day on Power and Politics, willopposition seats be lost due to todays vote.
Question of the Day

* September 22, 2010 3:16 PM | Comments83Recommend8
* By Ryan Hicks

Thank you for voting!
Yes 62.98% (958 votes)
No 34.45% (524 votes)
Unsure 2.56% (39 votes)
Total Votes: 1,521

It only lost by 2 votes. And only because of whipping and threats. I really don’t see that iggy would kick any of his few mps out of caucus. What if the threat was, vote with me so we keep the liberal party, or vote against and Jack and I are going to form a coalition and you wont be part of it.
What if that was the threat Layton also used in Regina. Remember, he admitted that he had worked on his coalition plan before the last election. Wonder what is on the rest of that tape.

It only lost by 2 votes. And only because of whipping and threats. I really don’t see that iggy would kick any of his few mps out of caucus. What if the threat was, vote with me so we keep the liberal party, or vote against and Jack and I are going to form a coalition and you wont be part of it.
What if that was the threat Layton also used in Regina. Remember, he admitted that he had worked on his coalition plan before the last election. Wonder what is on the rest of that tape.

It only lost by 2 votes. And only because of whipping and threats. I really don’t see that iggy would kick any of his few mps out of caucus. What if the threat was, vote with me so we keep the liberal party, or vote against and Jack and I are going to form a coalition and you wont be part of it.
What if that was the threat Layton also used in Regina. Remember, he admitted that he had worked on his coalition plan before the last election. Wonder what is on the rest of that tape.

1. I do not claim the registry prevents crime. I point out that it is useful to solve crime.

2. Yes, the police certainly do have to be prepared in case there is a gun in a car they stop. That’s kind of obvious.

3. If you do not think solving crime is important, can you please write Stephen Harper a letter and ask him to disband the DNA registry, the sex offenders registry, and the fingerprint registry? For that matter, why bother with the police at all?

1. I do not claim the registry prevents crime. I point out that it is useful to solve crime.

2. Yes, the police certainly do have to be prepared in case there is a gun in a car they stop. That’s kind of obvious.

3. If you do not think solving crime is important, can you please write Stephen Harper a letter and ask him to disband the DNA registry, the sex offenders registry, and the fingerprint registry? For that matter, why bother with the police at all?

Did you know Edmonton elected 2 liberal MP’s after the gun registry was implemented?

Did you know Edmonton elected 2 liberal MP’s after the gun registry was implemented?

Gayle says: “Clearly you had some trouble understanding this the first time around.”

Then Gayle, assuming her English professor mantle, writes: “I understand your tendance [sic] …”

As always, thanks for the laughs, dear one.

Gayle says: “Clearly you had some trouble understanding this the first time around.”

Then Gayle, assuming her English professor mantle, writes: “I understand your tendance [sic] …”

As always, thanks for the laughs, dear one.

It’s amazing, when you ask supporters of the gun registry why they are in favour of it, the first thing they say is because the Chiefs of Police say it’s a good thing. Many front line police officers say it’s a waste. Any cop that relies on the registry to protect him should turn in his badge. The day they can guarantee me that criminals will register their guns and more importantly someone who will actually use a gun in a criminal offence will register their gun, I will support it.

It’s amazing, when you ask supporters of the gun registry why they are in favour of it, the first thing they say is because the Chiefs of Police say it’s a good thing. Many front line police officers say it’s a waste. Any cop that relies on the registry to protect him should turn in his badge. The day they can guarantee me that criminals will register their guns and more importantly someone who will actually use a gun in a criminal offence will register their gun, I will support it.

Hey. You are right. A typo is just the same as poor reading comprehension!

I feel sorry for you – you seem so frantic about “proving” me wrong that you actually think you have something here.

I will leave you to savour your little victory here. Have a nice day!

Hey. You are right. A typo is just the same as poor reading comprehension!

I feel sorry for you – you seem so frantic about “proving” me wrong that you actually think you have something here.

I will leave you to savour your little victory here. Have a nice day!

No one cares if you support it, so I doubt anyone is going to bend over backwards to meet your impossible conditions.

But since you set such a high standard, why don’t you ask Harper to guarantee crime prevention before he spends billions of your dollars on his tough on crime policies – policies I know for a fact are not supported by some front line police officers, by the way.

No one cares if you support it, so I doubt anyone is going to bend over backwards to meet your impossible conditions.

But since you set such a high standard, why don’t you ask Harper to guarantee crime prevention before he spends billions of your dollars on his tough on crime policies – policies I know for a fact are not supported by some front line police officers, by the way.

Gayle, dear, your entire sentence read: “While I understand your tendance to take some words and pretend they mean something totally different, it simply is not the case here.”

The meaning of the word used in your sentence “tendance” means:
“tend·ance   
1. attention; care; ministration, as to the sick.
2. Archaic . servants or attendants.

It struck my funny bone, a bone which your body apparently lacks.
Why did it strike me funny? Partly because of your habitual pomposity, which has not diminished through your travels across the blogosphere.

But I won’t belabour the point about your probable prevarication re: reading the RCMP report, Gayle. Your retorts have grown really boring, despite the occasional flashes of unintended humour, so I bid you fare thee well.

You all miss the point. This is supposed to be a free democratic Country, whatever the majority want’s is whats right. On the next election the NDP and the Liberals will find
out what the people want. Harper must be laughing behind closed doors, the NDP has just
handed them a majority on a Golden Platter, Good Bye Long Gun Registry!

So if 48% want to keep the registry, and only 38% want to scrap it, then it should stay, right? And assuming these numbers stay this way, Harper would be violating the will of the people by continuing with plans to scrap it, right?

http://news.therecord.com/article/773465

But I think I like where you are going with this. The majority of Canadians voted for parties other than the CPC, so when the three opposition parties agree on something, Harper should agree since they represent the majority, right?