Debate About The Long Gun Registry In Canada – The Agenda

Part 1 of 4:


Part 2 of 4:


Part 3 of 4:


Part 4 of 4:



11 responses to “Debate About The Long Gun Registry In Canada – The Agenda”

  1. Thank you very much for posting this discussion series. Trying to raise the firearm issue here in Canada is incredibly difficult as we have been systematically told by our Government that firearms and their owners are evil, that they can’t be trusted to properly operate and store said weapons and that registration of the firearms will result in decreased violent crimes. This is not effective as criminals inherently don’t follow laws or purchase firearms through lawful channels, this is also applicable to the recent ban of passive ballistic vests in hopes of thwarting armoured criminal elements.

    Also, we’re talking about deregulation of long-guns which are responsible for far less violent crime in comparison to hand guns.

    Bottom line is the juice isn’t worth the squeeze. Let the long-gun registry die a merciful death.

    1. Amen!

    2. Admin (Mike) Avatar
      Admin (Mike)

      Glad to hear from you again! Looks like a pretty big mess there, hopefully they will get rid of that long gun registry ASAP and see that it will make no difference in crime. Once they realize that maybe the handgun one will be next?

      1. Love your blog Mike! It is a large mess with not enough pressure from citizens and that is thanks to our lack of any document stating a right to bear arms like your Second Amendment. The vaguest hint towards the right to bear arms is in the Canadian Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 7 “The Right to life, liberty, and the security of the person”. This is the same section I am arguing as grounds for the right to posses passive ballistic vests, which requires a permit as of July 1st, 2010. As far as I can tell, in Canada, you’re either supposed to die during an attack or wait for the police; helping yourself is not an option.

  2. I’ve never felt so relaxed watching opponents debate a hot topic on television. In America this would have been a shouting match from beginning to end.
    The timeline at the beginning of the debate is illustrative of the direction these government intrusions tend to take: to always take more ground, constantly maintaining that more needs to be taken.
    I wish our neighbors in Canada the best.

    1. Admin (Mike) Avatar
      Admin (Mike)

      I was surprised about how civil they all were too.

  3. Chief Blair continues to tout the ridiculous operating figure of four million dollars per year for the long gun registry. That would not even cover the salary and benefits for the 200 civil servants at the Firearms Centre! The RCMP estimate of 23 million dollars per year is more believable. Also, quoting ‘activity’ figures is like masturbation without a climax.

    The Chief and his allies are long on opinion but shy of documentation for their claims for registration. They still have not countered the negative analysis of the registration program by the Auditor General that registration did not result in greater public safety.

    Chief Blair and his Association of Chiefs are tainted by the fact they accepted perks/donations from the major registration contractor. A fact that led to the resignation of their own ethics watchdog. Tainted opinion from a politicized police Chief acting out of self interest is hardly a convincing argument. Perhaps we should elect Chiefs of Police. Then at least there would be some public accountability.

    Chief Blair offered no documentation for his claims. I suggest that is because there is nothing beyond his own self-serving opinion.

    1. Admin (Mike) Avatar
      Admin (Mike)

      yea 4 million any government related system seems laughably low, but even if it did cost that little.. if it is not doing anything to help the public then why does it even exist.

      1. I suspect it has to do with support contracts for whoever designed and maintains the databases. Maybe they’re large campaign contributors with a vested interest.

  4. Macumazahn Avatar

    The biggest laugh I get out of this whole fiasco is how so many people say the New DEMOCRATIC Party should force their MPs to vote against the will of their constituents.

  5. Yes, only in Canada could a ‘whipped’ vote be considered the democratic will of the electorate. If C-391 is defeated it will be a setback for the will of the majority of Canadians but then that is what stinks about our system. You only require about 24% of all eligible votes to form a majority government! No wonder 40% of the electorate consistently fail to vote in federal elections!

    I would be ashamed to vote Liberal after seeing their shameless defence of the long gun boondoggle.