An initial victory for rednecks

Well I hope the twelve New Democrats and eight Liberals who voted with the government to scrap the long-gun registry are feeling good about themselves. After all, this is exactly what Harper and the Reform Party wanted: to divide rural and urban Canada, while getting rural Liberal and NDP MPs to vote with the government. But what those MPs weren't considering when they voted is that Canada is an urban country and not a rural one, and the tide has already turned against them. But it will be nice one day when we can forge ahead and make real progress, and not have to cater to a very small and dwindling, yet very loud and vocal minority (who also reside in urban areas).

Anyways, federal MPs voted 164-137 to provide a "second reading" or "approval-in-principle" of Conservative MP Candice Hoeppner's private member's bill, to repeal the legal requirements to register shotguns and rifles. Hoeppner's private member's bill proposes that longstanding controls on restricted handguns and prohibited weapons would remain in place, as well as prerequisites that valid licenses must be held by all gun owners. The private member's bill doesn't specifically state that all of the contemporary information held on rifles and shotguns should be scrapped, however the actual Conservative government bill which proposed scrapping the registry altogether (which is presently going nowhere in the Senate) does. And Hoeppner believes that the registry and all relevant data should be destroyed. I thought Conservatives were supposed to be unwavering in their apparent support and bravado for "law and order".

Well, this private member's bill was expected to pass, with the Reform Party conducting an ad blitz campaign in their rural stomping grounds. But what didn't help and wasn't necessary was Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff proclaiming that the registry has "legitimacy" problems in rural areas and needs to be reformed. Right Michael. We have to register our pets, but registering dangerous guns which can be stolen, including locked-up rifles and shotguns, and used in deadly crimes raises questions about "legitimacy". Iggy went on to say that the Liberal caucus backs the "principle of gun control", which he believes should also include rifles and shotguns, but it faces resistance in rural Canada. So, we have to bend over backwards and cater to them, even though the Canadian Association of Police Chiefs support the registry, saying that initiatives to scrap the registry are irresponsible and a serious threat to the public safety. In 2004, Edgar A. MacLeod was the President of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, and made the following remarks:

We cannot combat the misuse of guns without strong controls. We just recently had a case where an individual made threats to staff at the Children's Aid. Because of the system we knew he had firearms and were able to obtain a warrant to seize them. I am receiving stories from police across the country about cases where the system has enabled them to take preventative action and investigate crime. There have also been cases where it has enhanced officer safety. While firearms violence remains a concern in Canada, rates of gun crime, homicide and death have fallen significantly over the last decade in part because of stricter controls. Dismantling our gun control system would be a step backwards.

But of course, the Liberal and NDP MPs who voted with the government seem to think they know better than the police. Regardless, Iggy would add that the Liberal caucus are working on proposals to bridge the gap between the urban and rural divide. He even suggested that it could include "decriminalizing" the registration system for long guns: a gun registration system which would include every kind of gun, and decriminalize but maintain a registration system for long guns. Decriminalization? I'm not sure I'm following here. The original registry calls for all rifles and shotguns to be registered, obviously including those which are legally owned by law-abiding Canadians. So what would be the point of decriminalization? It is legal to own rifles and shotguns in Canada, but rational people believe they should be registered, including the police.

Crafty Harper knew that a private member's bill would have a better chance at passing, considering that MPs are usually free to vote the way they wish on private member's bills, and are not obligated to vote along party lines when it comes to government legislation. And when Ignatieff and Layton concluded to allow free votes, it was essentially guaranteed that the private member's bill would pass. It's hard to argue against that, and I agree with free votes. But knowing that the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police support the registry, an exception could have been made here. I hope the New Democrats and Liberals hear about this from their supporters.

But the registry isn't finished, not even close. The private member's bill still has to clear a Parliamentary committee and the Senate, where hopefully rational minds will prevail and Hoeppner's bill will die. Once more quoting Ignatieff:

It's not the end of the firearms registration system tonight. It's only the beginning of a parliamentary process that will be pursued in committee and in the Senate.

What's even more infuriating is that the Harper government is keeping the RCMP's 2008 report on the registry, presented by RCMP Commissioner and Commissioner of Firearms William Elliott, under close guard. It has yet to be presented publicly in Parliament, as Peter Van Loan, the Minister of Public Safety, continues to sit on it (perhaps with his greasy fat ass). He received the report in the middle of October, and according to the rules has fifteen days to publicly disclose it. He told Parliament that Elliott's report would eventually be presented pubicly, but that the country doesn't require "another report" to know the registry is very efficient at harassing law-abiding outdoor enthusiasts and farmers, and wasting money while being terribly inefficient at combating crime. Wow. Another politician who seems to think he knows better than the police. Arrogance. If the report favoured getting rid of the registry, Harper probably would have released and flaunted it. Every Member of Parliament should have had access to the report before casting their vote. The bottom line is that Harper and the Conservatives don't want to listen to the police, but rather are more concerned with pursuing blind ideology.

The RCMP (who in 2006 took over administration of the firearms centre) stated in its 2007 report that the registry is:

key to the safety of both police offers and the public, providing police with immediate access to the information they require in their investigations and operations.

The RCMP stated that in 2007 they saw "better turnaround times" for both registrations and licenses, a growing number of police enquiries of the firearms registry, and the implementation of new software which modernized "production of notices to clients, court affidavits and other official documents." The 2007 report stated:

Overall, the Canadian Firearms Program was strengthened and woven more closely into the RCMP's National Police Services during 2007. It provided better service to law enforcement organizations, better service to licensing and registration clients, and was an important contributor to the RCMP's overall goal of 'safe homes, safe communities.' The RCMP is confident that 2008 will see continued progress in the priority areas.

As mentioned before, the bill is now off to a Parliamentary committee for further study, where hopefully it will go nowhere.