Archives

A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Gee, what a surprise.

Remember that report by the RCMP that got shelved after the former head of the Firearms registry got shuffled out of the position for “French language training?”. The one that Justice Minister Vic Toews said no one needed to see? Well, someone in the civil service didn’t agree with Mr. Toews; the report got leaked to CBC a day after his churlish and arrogant comments, and you can see why Vic didn’t want it released:

An RCMP evaluation report of Canada’s long-gun registry concludes that the program is cost effective, efficient and an important tool for law enforcement, CBC News has learned. The findings of the report, conducted with the help of outside auditors and completed six months ago, have been in the hands of the government since February, but have not yet been released. One section of the report states: “The program, as a whole, is an important tool for law enforcement. It also serves to increase accountability of firearm owners for their firearms.”

The report found that the cost of the program is in the range of $1.1 million to $3.6 million per year and that the Canadian Firearms Program is operating efficiently. “Overall the program is cost effective in reducing firearms related crime and promoting public safety through universal licensing of firearm owners and registration of firearms,” the report states.

The full report contains over 40 pages of analysis of the effectiveness of the firearms registry, in both urban and rural areas.

More data and facts that inconveniently for the Conservatives slam up against their ideology on killing this – which is why they didn’t want this released prior to the final votes on their “Private Member’s Bill”

20 comments to Gee, what a surprise.

  • Redrum

    no link, because posts with links get sidelined by his firewall / spam filter & require his manual intervention.

    but if you’re too dumb to google news sites to find it yourself, it’s on the CBC’s inside politics page, under the headline

    “RCMP’s report on the long-gun registry sent to MPs”

    it was released this aft. to Power & Politics, after finally being sent to the Committee (thanks to their having to agitate for it via the media).

    • Sideshow Bob

      @Redrum, Wow, why are you so angry?

      • Redrum

        @Sidesalad, because Harper is ruining the country, and endangering lives, and you punk-ass con-bots going around trolling & running interference for him — by trashing national institutions in the process on cue, if nec. — are like Vichy collaborators. As in, traitorous scum who should know better.

  • Sideshow Bob

    Redrum (?): And yet still no link? You and Scott seem to think that you can be selective in the wisdom of the RCMP. Canada’s cops constantly release reports and hold press conferences arguing that even Harper’s law & order agenda is harsh enough, or going fast enough. Do you and Scott just accept those RCMP findings as well?

    Anyway, why are you cranky? Did you furry ensemble arrive late in the mail?

  • Sideshow Bob

    I will file this in the same category as the RCMP report which states that tasers are completely safe.

    • Redrum

      @Sideshow Bob, uh-huh; and I’ll file your attempt at a drive-by smear in the same ‘dumbass’ waste bin as riding-in-pain’s.

      And besides, _which_ report was that, Mr. Throw-Them-Under-The-Bus-Before-They-Get-Here? the early ones setting policy where they believed what they were told w/o independent verification; the middle ones where they tried to CYA on the Dziekanski incident; or the final one conducted by independent reviewers, which was ordered & signed off by the current Commissionar, William Elliott — which _did_ call them on the above and told them to smarten up.

      http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2008/09/12/taser-review.html

      http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/tasers/pdf/taser-review-june08.pdf

      Cuz guess what, this new report is like that last one: ordered by Elliot, and conducted with the help of outside auditors. So back to the loony bin you go, Sideshow Bob… you won’t be murdering anyone today. (And get a haircut, you psychotic freak.)

      • Sideshow Bob

        @Redrum, Wow. A drive-by-smear of whom, exactly? The RCMP?

        “Cuz guess what, this new report is like that last one”

        Yeah, that’s kind of the point, doofus.

        Well, at least I now know that trolling commenters on Scott’s site is a piece of cake. 😀

    • Jon Pertwee

      @Sideshow Bob, why? Even if you are against the registry dont you think reading all sides allows you to present a more effective argument? The problem with the entire Taser thing is it’s a different argument entirely. Taser is a major company that has lobbyists embedded deeply into governments. Heck, the Taser lobbyist for Canada is a former Harper advisor. The first actual test of a Taser was done by the CBC later on. It was an episode of the Fifth Estate, I’ll see if I can find it.

      So if you discount a report in favour of the registry how do you expect a person supporting the registry to objectively reading a report against it? I just find it difficult to properly form an opinion on something without looking into it myself. The problem now seems to be one that Malcolm+ mentioned earlier; both sides seem to be poisoning the well and making discussion more difficult.

      The problem is, it isnt an all or none situation. Unfortunately for some, society requires a great deal of cooperation by all parties in order to function. By parties I mean people not political parties. So in some sense, some version of a gun registry may remain, although better tailored to make all parties happy. Just getting rid of it doesn’t solve the problem but finding a cooperative solution does.

      Cooperating and looking at all sides are Canadian traits and we should encourage them. Im actually done with the remarks for now (unless Ridenrain eggs me on 😉 ) because what Malcolm+ posted on Friday really got me thinking. In the long run all of this partisan bickering is just nonsense and instead of getting caught up in the pettiness I thought I would just start actually try talking to people with different viewpoints. Personally, I think Canadians are far better at solving things than our MPs these days. I dont buy populism and there is no way that any career politician is like me. Im just a regular Canadian like you and I want a better place to live. I just think its time to cooperate and fix things.

      So my challenge is this… I have read a lot of pro-registry reports and am curious to see the other side in a persuasive fashion. The urban/rural thing isnt impossible to solve, it just requires fair communication. Talking has to start somewhere. What do you think Sideshow Bob?

      • kmartin

        @Jon Pertwee, Actually I will agree with Jon that bringing the taser issue in is completely irrelevant. We should be sticking to the real issue of whether the gun registry is an effective tool for the police. My problem with the report is that even though Scott gave a link to a story it did not supply the real document as proof. Another fact is that it is in fact that the leaked report was from the rcmp who are actually in charge of the gun registry. If anyone is going to take this issue seriously and have REAL hard facts then an evaluation should be done by a completely independent agency or group that is not biased in any way. Allowing the RCMP to do an evaluation of an agency they are in charge of makes the report tainted in my view. Dont get me wrong. I am neither in favour or not of scrapping it. But lets get some real data to work with. I dont think the RCMP is in any way going to fail themselves in any report.

        • Sideshow Bob

          @kmartin, the reason that Scott didn’t link to the actual document is because he isn’t interested in real discussion or pursuing real solutions. He is just interested in shilling for the Liberal Party. It’s kind of sad, actually, since you would think he would have learned from the whole Dion episode.

        • Redrum

          @ Freakshow Bob, ah, no: “the reason that Scott didn’t link to the actual document [when he posted those remarks on August 26] is…”

          ….that it wasn’t released, yet — not until today [August 30]. But of course, you probably knew that, and what’s sad is you think you’re accomplishing something more than global warming by being such an asshole.

  • ridenrain

    .. and here I thought the PMO ran the RCMP. You folks need to get your scandals straight.

    • Jon Pertwee

      @ridenrain, Yeah ridofbrain, nice try. Must be sad these days when someone as stupid as you is unable to defend their own talking points.

      Ridofbrain…truly disappointing…too dumb to understand your own talking points.

      Must be tough in Conbot land these days. Maybe Malcolm+ can bless you with one of his hate sermons.

    • Redrum

      @syphiliticbrain, who said:, “and here I thought…” – so now we _know_ you’re lying; con-bots like you can’t think — only squawk.

  • Jon Pertwee

    Ha ha ridofbrain is the spokesman of stupid.

  • TofKW

    Hilarious ridofbrain. Attempting to deflect the topic by using a high-profile example of Reformatory fiscal mismanagement. The CPofC really is the party of stupid.

  • ridenrain

    I’m sure they have reports on how effective their efforts were in the G20 also.

    • Redrum

      @guilt-ridden-brain,

      predictable Con. reflexive instinct to shoot the messenger, but completely unfounded, as it happens.

      Actually, the RCMP’s portion of that was extremely effective: no one who wasn’t properly screened got any where near the international delegates.

      As you know full well, the royal cockups came from the other levels of gov’t who were remotely, um, ‘coordinated’ by your guy’s SNAFU team, the Integrated Security Unit.

      (from the ‘2010 G-20 Toronto summit preparations’ wiki:

      Security zones were split up into concentric rings with the summit site at the center.[9]

      The innermost security zone was handled by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) because the RCMP have jurisdiction over the security of Internationally Protected Persons (IPP)s and other dignitaries.[6]

      Oversight of the second ring outside the innermost was handled by the Toronto Police Service (TPS). Another ring was under the management of the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP).[6]

      In addition, the Canadian Forces (CF) support for the ISU draws on unique military resources and capabilities which are provided by the army, navy and air force.[6] The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) coordinated decision-making about establishing no-fly zones during the summits.

  • For these NeoCons it’s one “inconvenient truth” after another, which runs up against their very murky/cloudy sense of reality, and aversion to scientific/research facts…

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