Thursday, September 23, 2010

The Liberals need to make the case

The Liberals decision to whip the gun registry vote was a step in the right direction, but people should not get too excited.

The Liberals still seem to believe that by sounding serious, flexible and sympathetic they will have a chance to win the next election. They are dreaming. A lot of the success Conservatives have enjoyed stems from the fact that however, stupid their arguments and policies, they are the only ones willing to put forward some. When pundits talk about policy or arguments used to buttress it; they deal with Conservative policies and arguments. The Liberals give them nothing to talk about. The Liberals have abandoned the field altogether; they do not put forward polices; they do not put forward arguments; they do not refute arguments. They might tut tut and promise to "compromise", but this only hurts them. The former makes them appear to be the effeminate wimps the Conservatives claim them to be and the later makes it appear that the various Conservative arguments polices have some validity when in actuality they have none. At best, the Liberals will sometimes take a stand in defense of the status quo. The aforementioned gun registry is a case in point. However, do not expect them to say much of anything when they do take a stand. They might note that the experts support them, but they will not repeat the expert's arguments least someone take offense to what the experts are saying and want to shoot the messenger.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Whenever an anti-gun control farmer or hick complains about the registry, Ignatieff should call him an idiot. Because that's what he is.

Gun nuts are stupid, hillbilly, backward fuck-ups. I am so glad that we progressives outvote them.

CanadianSense said...

I disagree with Ignatieff playing his cards right.

If he let those rural MPs vote on behalf of their constituents, would he be blamed for the next mass murder with a long gun?

He could have distanced himself from the wasteful ineffective long gun registry created by Allan Rock in 1995.

He chose to go back in time and play the emotional card, citing Police Chiefs and Women's Groups as cover.

It worked against Manning but it won't help against Harper.

Anonymous said...

I am willing to bet that The Professor was a gun owner back in his days in the USA.

Koby said...

That is really rich Canadian Sense.

I hope for the sake of consistency you are lamenting Stephen Harper not letting his Quebec MPs "reflect the views of their constituents". As for appeals to emotion, no one tops Harper and the Conservatives. For example: "Today, Martin says he's against child pornography. But his voting record proves otherwise," Of course, such appeals to emotion are made all the worse by the fact that many Conservatives are of the mind, as 2006 Conservative candidate form Ajax Pickering famously said, “The facts don’t matter.” I hope you are lamenting that too.

As for the effectiveness of the gun registry, there are many myths Conservatives like to tell themselves. The world is flat, the moon made of cheese, Trudeau is responsible for the debt, the media is in bed with the Liberals, the world is cooling, god created the world 6,000 years ago, pot is potent, SSM harms children, a 14 year, while not old enough to drink, marry, drive, vote, work or have sex is nevertheless an adult when it comes to the criminal justice matters and anyone who ever legally purchased a gun is a candidate for sainthood and utterly incable of committing a crime.

You seem to believe in the last of these. Tell me straight up that 1) registering a gun does not make it easier for the authorities to seize it and 2) there is never any reason to seize the weapons of gun owners convicted of a crime or suffering from mental illness.

CanadianSense said...

Wow,

This has been a central promise made for several elections by the Reform, CA, CPC MPs?

Heck even the PM voted 2x to keep the registry when he was an MP. Looks like he is flexible to bend to the wishes of his MPs.

20 MPs voted 2x to scrap it? Some of them had spent a decade speaking up against it.

Do you have any evidence the Quebec MPs were in favour of the wasteful registry created in 1995?

I think many PM's are responsible for decisions of their government.

For instance the Maple Three reactors were to replace the aging Chalk River Reactor that was to be decommissioned in 2000.

The CPC are now cleaning up the mess, neglect left by the Chretien Liberals who mothballed the Maple Reactors and did not have an replacement for the Chalk River facility.

I don't accept a Registry works as sold by the Liberals. The facts and evidence do not back up the claims.

It is not an emotional issue. What does your religious intolerance have to do with a registry?

You are entitled to your view why Liberals used a tragedy to paint a regional Western party as un-canadian extremists.

It does not change the fact this program costs between 66-106 million on an annual basis depending upon what source (Report, CTF)

It does not change the fact that lawful citizens who have ten guns can have their charter rights suspended through a warrant-less search and questioning.

The Report also states our law enforcement will not apply the registry to aboriginals on reserves.

I don't see a hard right wing ideological party. I see a Centre, centre right party with a mushy platform that includes massive spending to fix the deep cuts made by the previous government.

Look at the Kevin Page reports and the Reports from the Auditor General. Nothing scary.

Compare those reports to the time of the Liberals including Gomery, Somalia Inquiry, Tainted Blood, APEC.

Which government was scary again?

Koby said...

CS: "Do you have any evidence the Quebec MPs were in favour of the wasteful registry created in 1995?"

You said " If he let those rural MPs vote on behalf of their constituents" and I responded thus. "I hope for the sake of consistency you are lamenting Stephen Harper not letting his Quebec MPs 'reflect the views of their constituents'." I can assure you that the constituents in various Conservative Quebec City seats want to keep on registering long guns. Support for this view is at 60% in Quebec and higher still in urban areas. As for the whipping the vote, feel free to tell yourself that it was not government bill in private members drag and that Conservative MPs were free to vote how they saw fit. I think you are dead wrong, but I do not much care. I do not share your love of free votes. In fact, I feel the lack of party discipline in the US has done nothing but hurt them.

CS: "I don't accept a Registry works as sold by the Liberals. The facts and evidence do not back up the claims."

"As sold by the Liberals".? What a bunch of mealy mouthed clap trap. The only question that matters is this: does it work?

By the way, I see you did not respond to the following.

"Tell me straight up that 1) registering a gun does not make it easier for the authorities to seize it and 2) there is never any reason to seize the weapons of gun owners convicted of a crime or suffering from mental illness."

CS: "It is not an emotional issue."

Ha ha. Well, the Conservatives have certainly played on peoples emotions.

“[Ignatieff's] true colours are showing, and if his caucus has any integrity, those colours should be black and blue.”

" It's like a cult [opposition in the House] that is led by organizations of police chiefs who pretend the registry helps them do their jobs. They should be ashamed."

" they [police chiefs] need a database that will help them locate and seize those firearms as soon as a licence or registration expires,"

Koby said...

CS: "What does your religious intolerance have to do with a registry?"

I see you have no understanding of what religious tolerance actually means. Poking fun at religious belief is not at all the same as treating someone differently because of their race. Beliefs are fair game. People's skin colour is not. Furthermore, it seems to have escaped you that the ability to worship as one sees fit is premised on one being able to freely ridicule that same belief system. There is no freedom of religion without there being freedom from religion. Where blasphemy is a crime there is no freedom of religion.

As for the silly notion that the world is 6,000 years old, it should be pointed out that such a belief is incompatible with virtually the whole of modern science.

CS: "It does not change the fact this program costs between 66-106 million on an annual basis depending upon what source (Report, CTF)"

The Conservatives have no plans to scrap the gun registry or licensing program. They only plan to stop registering long guns thus turning the gun registry into a restricted and prohibited gun registry. The cost of registering long guns is around 1 to 4 million a year.


CS: "don't see a hard right wing ideological party. I see a Centre, centre right party with a mushy platform that includes massive spending to fix the deep cuts made by the previous government."

Look, in the 1993 Garth Turner ran for the leadership of the Progressive Conservatives. He was considered hard right at the time. 14 years later Garth Turner was a Liberal MP and Turner repeatedly claimed that Stephen Harper was too far right. Turner's views did not change. It is just that the Liberal party has moved that much to the right. Indeed, there is nothing liberal about most of Canada's Liberal parties. Gordan Campbell is by anyone's definition is hard right, Charest is a conservative and Paul Martin was even by Stephen Harper's judgment took the country in a conservative direction. Some Conservatives were content to be "Paul Martin in a hurry"; Harper wanted them to be Paul Martin in full sprint.

As for the competence of this government, not only is there general agreement that this government altogether lacks front end talent, there also general agreement that this is the most stridently ideological government in modern Canadian history. Whether it be Insite, the census, crime, and indeed the Chauk reactor this government has mau maued expert opinion, and played fast and loose with the facts. It is, rightly, named the stupid party.

CanadianSense said...

Koby @ 3:05

We agree to disagree treating MPs as sheep on this specific issue.

You demand Quebec impose their views in Canada because your alleged numbers support it?

Angus Poll, internet polls shows this is not a wedge issue to be exploited in rural vs urban, gender etc.

I am an "urbanite", non gun owner with no skin in the game.

My opposition to the bad policy is because it does not deliver the results as promised by the props.

You are free to deny the emotional hysteria "it saves lives" why this was created and the use of Women's groups, political appointees Police Chiefs as props.

Context is everything and a study, report does not exist that proves a Registry works.

As I have stated, registries and bans have not worked in other countries. We have had a registry on hand guns since 1934 and it has not fixed the "improper use" of hand guns.

Do you believe in more state regulation and bigger government to "fix the problems" of society?

I think we disagree on what level of state intervention is necessary. The track record looking to expect people in those big governments for solving societal problems does not support your thesis for a socialist utopia on earth.

Can you point to your perfect Nanny State and their socialist utopia?

CanadianSense said...

Koby @ 5:29

It is interesting how your cite a candidate's "inappropriate remark" as the basis for your blanket bias against the entire party.

Has the fact your point is so weak on LGR you need to resort to moving the goal posts and suggest I should accept his outburst as evidence why it should stand?

The downward spiral of your post is to invoke Garth Turner who was rejected by Conservatives, Liberals, and ultimately the voters as the basis to judge the political landscape?

Returning back to debate on the merit of LGR is problematic for you?

You see large ideological differences between the current government and the past. Many voters don't. That is why they switch them out from time to time when one party "does stupid".

Most of us don't buy in fake moon-landing US caused 9/11 truther stuff. Evil left or right wing conspiracy stuff.

It is about respect of taxpayers money and intelligence. Lose that and your days in office are numbered.

Koby said...

CS: "You demand Quebec impose their views in Canada because your alleged numbers support it?"

How the hell did you conclude that from the following?

"I can assure you that the constituents in various Conservative Quebec City seats want to keep on registering long guns. Support for this view is at 60% in Quebec and higher still in urban areas."

Let me drill what I said into your head -- again --- least you dream up another wild eyed interpretation. You said the 8 "rural" Liberal MPs votes should have reflected their constituents. This implies that you think that they did not reelect the views of their constituents. Their constituents no longer wanted to register long guns and they voted, as per Ignatieff's orders, to keep doing so. I will leave out the fact that this comment, "Angus Poll, Internet polls shows this is not a wedge issue to be exploited in rural vs urban, gender etc" undermines everything you say.

This is how I responded. "I hope for the sake of consistency you are lamenting Stephen Harper not letting his Quebec MPs 'reflect the views of their constituents'."

Are you still with me?

Anyway, this how you responded to my response. CS: "Do you have any evidence the Quebec MPs were in favour of the wasteful registry created in 1995?"

I pointed out you needed to reread what I said.

"You said " If he let those rural MPs vote on behalf of their constituents" and I responded thus. "I hope for the sake of consistency you are lamenting Stephen Harper not letting his Quebec MPs 'reflect the views of their constituents'." I can assure you that the constituents in various Conservative Quebec City seats want to keep on registering long guns. Support for this view is at 60% in Quebec and higher still in urban areas."

Koby said...

CS: "report does not exist that proves a Registry works."

"international experts have concluded that restriction of access to lethal means is one of the few suicide-prevention policies with proven effectiveness."


"Where the method is common, restriction of means has led to lower overall suicide rates: firearms in Canada"

A Systematic Review

J. John Mann, MD; Alan Apter, MD; Jose Bertolote, MD; Annette Beautrais, PhD; Dianne Currier, PhD; Ann Haas, PhD; Ulrich Hegerl, MD; Jouko Lonnqvist, MD; Kevin Malone, MD; Andrej Marusic, MD, PhD; Lars Mehlum, MD; George Patton, MD; Michael Phillips, MD; Wolfgang Rutz, MD; Zoltan Rihmer, MD, PhD, DSc; Armin Schmidtke, MD, PhD; David Shaffer, MD; Morton Silverman, MD; Yoshitomo Takahashi, MD; Airi Varnik, MD; Danuta Wasserman, MD; Paul Yip, PhD; Herbert Hendin, MD

JAMA. 2005;294:2064-2074.

CS "It is interesting how your cite a candidate's "inappropriate remark" as the basis for your blanket bias against the entire party."

Garry Breitkreuz is not a candidate. He is the Conservative MP that has led the charge against registering long guns. And what is interesting and uproariously funny is you echoing the words of his press release while at the same time as trying to distance yourself from them.

Breitkreuz: It's like a cult [opposition in the House] that is led by organizations of police chiefs who pretend the registry helps them do their jobs. They should be ashamed."

CS: You are free to deny the emotional hysteria "it saves lives" why this was created and the use of Women's groups, political appointees Police Chiefs as props.


CS: "Has the fact your point is so weak on LGR you need to resort to moving the goal posts and suggest I should accept his outburst as evidence why it should stand?"

Christ, CS not only do you need to take the time to understand what is said, least you go off half cocked (see above), you also need to take the time to understand what a term or saying actually means before using it. To move the goal posts means to change the definition of a class in an attempt to ward off a damaging evidence. For example: Joe says "No Conservative MP played to people's emotions during the gun debate". George responds Gary Breitkreuz did and he is Conservative. Joe responds to George thus. "Gary Breitkreuz is not a true Conservative. Joe is guilty of moving the goal posts.

I took the shot!

CS "You see large ideological differences between the current government and the past. Many voters don't."

Both Chretien, Martin were conservative Prime Minsters. There is no doubt about it. However, to think that somehow this makes this Conservative government "centrist" is strange. Say there are two sisters. One had really blond hair as a kid the other jet black. As they grew the blond's hair grew ever darker while other sister's hair did not change. It would be strange of the black haired sister to say of her own hair that she was almost blond as a result of the changes to her sister's hair.

CanadianSense said...

The Canada Firearms Centre has made satisfactory progress in implementing our 2002 recommendation on financial reporting, except in recording the costs of developing a new information system (CFIS II). Although the Centre correctly reported the total cumulative costs of CFIS II at 31 March 2005, in two cases significant costs were not recorded in the correct fiscal year. With the concurrence of the Treasury Board Secretariat, but contrary to the government's accounting policy and good accounting practices, the Centre understated the costs of CFIS II by $21.8 million as at 31 March 2004.

How do you get 4 million again when the AG states the LGR costs are being under reported by 21 million?

http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_200605_04_e_14961.html

ridenrain said...

Since the coalition won the vote and they talked about removing the penalties, can Ontario give Bruce Montague back his house?

Anonymous said...

You mean, "Bruce Montague, [a gunsmith, and] a member of the Canadian Unregistered Firearms Owners Association, [who] has been challenging police to arrest him under the controversial Firearms Act for more than a year. He marched on Parliament Hill on New Year's Day 2003 with an unregistered firearm in his hand. But it was his alleged violation of the Criminal Code that finally brought the law down on him at a Dryden, Ont., gun show on Sept. 11...[when he] was arrested by six plainclothes police officers. The Ontario Provincial Police charged the gunsmith with two counts of unauthorized possession of firearms, two counts of careless storage of a firearm, failure to use reasonable care with an explosive, and unlawful possession of an explosive. Cops later laid two additional charges: tampering with a serial number of a firearm and possession of a gun for the purpose of trafficking."

Yeah, boy, was he ever railroaded. (Gag)

You sure can pick the right battles, R&R: that poor martyr for the cause (of 'To Hell with The Man! I'm going to carry any damn firepower I want & enable punks to do the same by looking the other way about their paperwork when they bring in stolen guns to me to fix).

Go play with your knife collection.