x

[Joan]

x

Edited September 13, 2012 by Guest

[bradm]

I wonder if this promise could be a bad thing for the Liberals: all the Conservatives have to do is point out how badly the gun registry went, and the Liberals credibility on the gun issue will be damaged.

Aloha,

Brad

[TomFoolery]

Now, if they got rid of the registry for hunting weapons and just stuck to, say, a hand-gun and other assault weapons ban...

[AD]

Those criminals better listen up! Those guns are ILLEGAL dude!! Hand them in!!

nice try paul.

AD

[Del]

We will also re-introduce legislation to crack down on violent gun crimes and gang violence, by doubling the mandatory minimums for key gun crimes: trafficking of firearms, smuggling of firearms, and illegal possession of loaded handguns in public places.

I hope d_rawk comments on this, as his position on the Conservatives wanting to introduce mandatory minimums for drug offences was quite clear:

And of course, mandatory sentencing has worked oh-ever-so well south of the border. *rolling eyes*

But at least it will be booming good times for the Canadian private prison system. [color:purple]Woohoo, job growth!

[AD]

The Canada Handgun Ban is for provinces and territories that choose to participate. It will be up to them to decide if a handgun ban is appropriate for their jurisdiction.

disclaimer: i'm feeling a bit surly today.

How does an optional program show leadership? How well do you think this will play outside of Toronto? Aren't people still super-pissed about the gun registry?

[bradm]

Making it optional for provinces also introduces a problem that they have in the USA (assuming not all of them participate): with different jurisdictions having different laws, all people need to do is go where it's easiest to get the guns, then come home.

Aloha,

Brad

[Jay Funk Dawg]

My experience is that voters get super pissed at everything. It's the ones they're least pissed at that will get elected... until a real leader comes along. and....

There are places outside Toronto? Well you learn something new every day! Thanks AD.

[d_rawk]

Haha, I was going to try to stay clear of this one, One

But for what it's worth, I heard the rumours that the Liberal Party was going to make this announcement and hoped it weren't so.

I don't quite understand what they are trying to accomplish with an outright ban on something that is pretty much illegal anyways (handgun ownership) except under already strict circumstances. Except maybe that they are hoping that the Conservative Party will speak out against it and come out looking like the Republican-lite part.

Some of the other stuff in the proposal looks ok to me, though. Have to sort through it, still.

And I remain skeptical of mandatory minimums. There was talk of introducing them even before Parliament dissolved. Irwin Cotler, the Liberal Minister of Justice, lent them his support even though he didn't think they would be effective.

Cotler himself has made it clear that political realities cannot be ignored.

"Our experience and scientific research show that mandatory minimum penalties are not a deterrent, nor are they effective," he said in June

[...]

In fact, Cotler went on to say, they yield results that are "the opposite of what people supporting the option wanted to achieve."

Nevertheless, he said minimums were inserted at the insistence of the Conservatives and Bloc Quebecois to ensure the bill was passed.

On Thursday, Cotler confirmed that new legislation would be forthcoming, arguing that minimum sentences would send a strong message to judges, prosecutors and criminals that Parliament wants an end to gun violence.

Critics, however, fear the move is a sign that electioneering and exploiting public fears are taking precedence over common sense and the integrity of the judicial system.

In a letter to Cotler this month, the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies said mandatory minimums have no "discernible deterrent benefit" and result in "skyrocketing incarceration rates" for minorities.

"Rather than reduce crime, these approaches have in fact exacerbated the problem," said Colleen Minnabarriet, vice-president of the advocacy group for females in conflict with the law.

"This approach has failed and, paradoxically, has resulted in unsafe communities and increased violence."

Dismal results have prompted even conservative jurisdictions such as Michigan and Australia's Northern Territories to back away, Minnabarriet said.

Tony Doob, a professor of criminology at the University of Toronto, called mandatory minimums for gun crimes an "insult" to judges, who are already legally bound to tailor punishments to fit the crime.

"Study after study shows these things have zero impact on crime (but) everybody's looking for a quick fix," said Doob, who added that he's most troubled by politicians who are pretending to make Canada's streets safer.

"They're trying to deceive the public into thinking that they've done something effective," he said. "It's just simple dishonesty."

[AD]

I wish someone would step up and ban my co-workers.

ad

[AD]

That makes sense. In a uniquely Canadian way.

AD

[Davey Boy 2.0]

i'm not giving up my handgun, dammit!

[Birdy]

is the gun the criminal?

what's next?

a total ban on baseball bats? kitchen cleavers? scissors?

will john doe be required to hose down the forming icicles on his garage eaves trough, simply because they're "dangerous"? c'mon.

[AD]

will john doe be required to hose down the forming icicles on his garage eaves trough, simply because they're "dangerous"? c'mon.

sometimes i wish my landlord would follow that logic.

i'm gonna get killed by water sometime in the next 4 months.

ad

[Birdy]

it's a possibility ad.. i just read a little blurb on a woman in kiev who was killed by one. ouch. what a way to go.

sugar megs you definitely have a heart and that's a good thing. i think if government is to serve any purpose it should focus on what makes a criminal a criminal, not on his weapon of choice.

Edited December 8, 2005 by Guest

[d_rawk]

I tend to think focusing on poverty reduction, addressing ghettoization (mixed income communities, affordable housing, re-introduce co-op housing programs!) and other measures that are less cynical than 'time to get tough on crime!' are probably more effective in the long run.

And also, we've had an effective handgun registry since, like, 1930. Isn't the problem of conditional sentencing and lax bail terms in large part a result of space shortage in correctional facilities? Where are we going to put these people?

[Birdy]

time and money better spent indeed.. throw education in there too. educate the little ones so they don't grow into gun wieldin' criminals.

yee _ _ _ !

[AD]

we should ship them to michigan.

ad

[Diggzz]

The most recent murder in TO was performed by a young man (being recruited by NCAA baskestbal teams no-less) who was charged about a month ago for carrying a concealed, loaded, cocked, gun with serial numbers scratched off, he also tried to evade the cops. He was charged with 10 different offences. He was out on bail within 24 hours. Problem with the gun or problem with the system?

[AD]

.... or outsider looking in on system?

(i agree with you though, just playing devil's advocate)

ad

[Diggzz]

Yes but perception is a HUGE part of this election.

[SevenSeasJim]

will john doe be required to hose down the forming icicles on his garage eaves trough, simply because they're "dangerous"? c'mon.

Isn't John Doe an adult movie star? If so, then your statement is even funnier. :grin:

[SevenSeasJim]

Oh ya and when are the leaders going to talk about something that most people care about?

[d_rawk]

Depends, SSJ. Whatcha have in mind?

[SevenSeasJim]

Depends, SSJ. Whatcha have in mind?

24 hour open bars like the UK just started :wink: