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.

I guess someone didn’t have good sources on the gun registry vote.

In case you didn’t know already, Bill C-391 – the so-called “private member’s bill” (and I say that with as much sarcasm as I can muster on typed words) which was going to kill the long-gun registry, was itself killed in a 153-151 vote tonight in the House of Commons. A Liberal motion by Mark Holland was successful in getting enough votes to not allow it to proceed – a major victory for those of us (such as the police) who believe that the long gun registry is a valuable tool to have in the fight against gun crimes.

As an aside to that, all Liberal MP’s voted yes for the motion.I note that according to Blogging Tories leader and Manning Institute colleague Stephen Taylor last night, he heard differently. Apparently, Stephen’s sources aren’t very good, or he decided to spread PMO talking points, (or perhaps his own mischief).  I’ve been eagerly awaiting his response, but so far no response is forthcoming.

Moral of the story? Stephen may have good sources within the PMO and the Conervative Party, but my advice to other bloggers and political followers? I’d take whatever he claims to know about the Liberal caucus with a huge mountain of salt, because he was dead wrong on this.

31 comments to I guess someone didn’t have good sources on the gun registry vote.

    • @James Bagan, I thank the COnservatives for putting all their urban and Quebec Conservative Mp’s in peril.

      • James Bagan

        @Scott Tribe, for this to be true, then urban-dwellers would have to be as motivated as rural-dwellers to vote on the basis of their views on the gun registry. You will not find a shred of empirical evidence anywhere to support this view.

        • Redrum

          @James Bagan, since when do Cons put any, um, Stock, in empirical evidence when opining on political matters? We’ve got unreported evidence from that, streaming over our Twitterverse, and have heard from thousands of front-line police officers …and most importantly, know it in our guts. “Empirical Evidence”: hrruumph. Elitist.

        • James Bagan

          @Redrum, ummmm, thanks, very interesting contribution.

    • Redrum

      @James Bagan, Ha. We gotta take whatever pollster Darrell Bricker says about political issues with a giant grain of salt: he’s such a partisan hack — former in-house pollster for the Mulroney gov’t, he dutifully returned to Con-swervative duty during the Great Census Debacle this summer and sold out his own industry when he appeared before the Commons Committee to defend Clumsent, and testified what he should have well known was a blatant falsehood, given his profession: that private pollsters could do everything they needed to just as well without a long form census (even though it is used to properly over-sample and weight the usually under-represented groups to make sure that their ridiculously small and error-prone public opinion polls are more representative of the actual population).

  • ridenrain

    I know it might take some time for you to check with Toronto and back so I’ll wait.

    • I see you!

      @Bill Kiechle, hey, I see you signed a petition — hosted by an INTERNATIONAL organization. Shame on you for subverting our democratic process. Why, I bet George Soros is behind those stinkin’ commie “Go Petition” folks… I think I heard that somewhere…. on Fox, I think it was, so it must be true….

      (google “william Kiechle” and click on the ‘cache’ for “No Coalition – A Petition to The Governor General of Canada” (‘this makes a mockery of my vote’)

  • I see you!

    Guess this is you on the cover on your Bumble Bee Beemer, eh? Born to be riled.

    www. + beeceebeemers.com/PDFs/dasRundAug_Dec05.pdf

  • ridenrain

    That I always use the same name must have been a huge wake up call. The fact that you winps use anon so often shows how little faith you put behind your words.

  • ridenrain

    ..and all the cowards shout insults from the safety of the darkness.

  • I see you!

    And hey, guess what: speaking of rubbing their noses in it, that pesky Ridenrain finally outed himself, by posting one of his usual trademark beside-the-point rants on a Liberal Senator’s site and, um, signing on with his real name:

    www + .liberalsenateforum.ca/Comments/10592

    www. + facebook.com/bkiechle

    (mystery solved: he’s a BMW bike fan, so his nickname — and email addy is just his usual witty, macho way of saying he likes to “ride (his motorbike) in rain”, after all: www. + beeceebeemers.com/PDFs/dasRundWinter06b.pdf )

    And, oh, how cute, he’s even a contributor to a little DIY “Fox News Canada” which is why he’s been such an Ezra & Kory cheerleader

    http + ://ml-in.facebook.com/posted.php?id=40246654125&share_id=155906461104023&comments=1

  • ck

    Hope Stephen Taylor is enjoying his supper of Crow & humble pie.

  • Michael Harkov

    Apparently on BCL’s blog and in other places I have been accused of being “The Observer”, and the “Intfn” sockpuppers. An IP check contrasted against them should clear that right up. Thanks.

    • @Michael Harkov, Well, for the record, I’ve never been the one accusing you of that.

    • Jon Pertwee

      @Michael Harkov, well a proxy router like the TOR Server would muddle up that IP record. Come on Harkov, we arent all that internet stupid.

      • Jon Pertwee

        @Jon Pertwee, it’s funny but the above Harkovism is turning out to be a spam post across the blogosphere. Methinks someone doth protest too much.

        Guilty conscience Harkov?

        • Michael Harkov

          Guilty conscience Harkov?

          Hardly, LOL. But anyone bothering to check will note that mine is an Eastlink IP, not a proxy router which would be obvious.

          We arent all that internet stupid.

          Well, apparently, you are.

        • Jon Pertwee

          @Jon Pertwee, Actually you are that stupid and beyond. All I said was someone with proxy router can flub up IPs. Funny thing is they can emulate routers too. That was the gist of the comment Harkov.

          Thank you for telling us your router type. Do you think we should just take your word that you dont use a router? I mean conbots have a habit of lying about these things dont they.

          So genius, how does a blog reader like myself look up ip addresses on a blog? Isnt that the privilege of the blog owner? Or have you been phishing. Last time I checked with my host, the only one that could look that stuff up was myself and the host. Actually, most of the apps that I have used to track site traffic are accessible only by me. Unless of course you know my passwords. Good luck with that Harkov.

  • kwittet

    And so the wasteful government spending continues.

    • Jon Pertwee

      @kwittet, yeah like those untendered fighters and the private prisons for unreported criminals. Let’s not forget the fake lake… was it called Lake Record Deficit? Glad to see we’re on the same page Kwittet.

      • @Jon Pertwee, Just for the record, Kevin is a cousin of mine.. who I get along fine with. We just dont agree politically .. so be nice 🙂

      • ck

        @Jon Pertwee, I heard Lake Inferior was the winning name for Fake Lake. And you forgot billion plus dollars for G20 photo ops.

      • kwittet

        @Jon Pertwee, You see Jon..i just have a different opinion..even though the dark side won this time around I still feel that the registry is a total waste of money and time. Its funny that i haven’t posted in a very long time and picked just yesterday to wade back in. I read some old posts last night and the one thing that stuck out to me so much was how the pro-registry people kept on about how the data base was accessed up to 11,000 times per day. So I sent off an email last night to the person who was responsible for reprogramming CPIC(she was the team leader). That person was my mothers sister(my aunt). She told me in her email that the number is artificially high due to the fact that every time a persons license plate is run it hits the gun registry, a person who is stopped by the police walking down the street and is asked for ID is hits the data base. Or those new super cop cars they now have in the GTA with cameras mounted to scan license plates for invalid stickers, stolen plates etc..it hits the gun registry data base. That is the way she was told to set the system up. No matter what is typed in to CPIC it hits the data base. So when the pro side and the Police Chiefs all say that they use it 11000 times per day they are using it 11000 times per day. Just not for the reason of actually checking for firearms. It just by default checks the data base. I am sure that the actual figure for hits related to criminal activity to see if there are any legal guns registered to whatever they are accessing is very much lower.

        I think the registry could be of some use if it actually was designed to actually help slow down crime. I just cant see how it does that right now the way it stands. It was a knee-jerk reaction to the Montreal Massacre(god rest all their souls) to make it appear that government was doing something.

        I am not going to comment on the fighters because I know little about how that worked. I do have a friend who works with the DND who told me that the CF-18’s they have now are starting to cost a fortune to repair and upgrade. I dont know anything about a lake except for the ones I canoed this summer.

        Scott..let Jon take his shots..i have very thick skin..I can take it. I don’t feel the need to resort to that to make myself feel superior.

        • Redrum

          @kwittet, Fair enough: you’re right, there was a lot of bad faith and incompetence on the part of the Police Chiefs & the Firearms Centre in advancing those particular numbers as if they were proof of the thing’s usefulness.

          THe frustrating thing to me, who’s come late to this debate (as a complacent city-dweller who never gave this issue much thought before), and has been cobbling a serious evidence-based case together as best I can based on whatever free, piecemeal public information I can find is that:

          – there is an awful lot of data in the three datafiles — the ‘Homicide Survey,’ the ‘Causes of Death,’ survey and the (firearms-related)’Incident-based crime statistics, by detailed violations’ database of all the police reports each year; and,
          – until recently, there _was_ an awful lot of expertise in Statistics Canada who could have analyzed all that properly, to resolve a lot of these questions once & for all, but:

          it appears that the Harper gov’t has either reassigned them, forced them out, or has them sitting on their hands, instead of assigning them to do an honest appraisal of those important questions using the largely unused & wasted data at their disposal.

          And the media and the Oppo. have been too lazy, overworked, or incompetent to do a proper job of it, either (hey! hire me! but that’s probaby the real reason: they’re too broke to spring for research).

          THe Mounties & the CFC have also done a piss-poor job of keeping track of all the things they should to monitor the effects of their programs, too, just as the AG siad in ’02 & ’06, and I reiterated here two or three weeks ago.

          Trouble is, too many Cons & Con-supporters have trouble with logic & grammar, and have mistaken her pronouncement that they had failed to demonstrate its value / effect as meaning that she demonstrated that it had NO value / effect: au contraire, they’d just failed to make a good case one way or another, until now, though they have made some baby steps in that direction in the Feb. evaluation report.

        • P. Goddet

          @kwittet,

          Kwittet, I don’t doubt you think you’ve “caught” the police chiefs in a lie. But the logic is flawed and the motivations behind it are disingenuous.
          As a computer systems specialist I would point out that given there is such a database it would be the height of stupidity not to link it to general inquiries. So it is accessed as many times as they say, and for good reason.
          If you choose to exercise your freedom to own firearms, you are well aware the police will take that into account when you have dealings with them. In the finest of conservative traditions, “If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about”.
          On the other hand, I choose not to have weapons. I appreciate the fact that if for any reason the police should knock on my door, they won’t be doing so with apprehension based on the fact I have firearms in my home.
          If you want guns for protection, you may have them. But the rest of us then have the right to be protected from you.

  • Observer,

    If your comment demonstrates Canadian values, I’m moving back to Britain.

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