Wednesday 22 September 2010

Gun registry winners and losers

big winner: Jack Layton. Four words that I never thought I'd have to string together, but there it is...

I think Jack handled the whole gun registry debate better than anyone. While Harper was whipping his MPs to vote to kill the registry, as you would expect from a iron-fisted leader hailing from gun-toting red-neck country; and while Iggy was whipping his boys and girls to vote against killing the registry, as you would expect from a bunch of out-of-touch money-wasting urban lefty elitists; Jack was playing it cool. While he clearly stated his own preference -- as any leader should on an important issue -- he allowed his MPs to vote as they saw fit while proposing an alternative of some kind, thereby positioning himself as the moderate in this whole affair. Tired old Wacky Jacky is all of a sudden the captain of common sense and compromise.

Canadians are desperate for more of that: cooler heads, compromise solutions, and acknowledgment that different constituencies have different values. I personally would like to see more open votes in the House. The rhetoric will get toned down because you are less likely to fear monger and hurl insults when some of your own colleagues are voting the other way. Ultimately I think it would lead to a more productive parliament.

winner: Tory MP Candice Hoeppner
Who is Candice Hoeppner? A few weeks ago I would have guessed a third liner on Canada's women's hockey team. Now I know differently. Even though her bill failed, she has still put herself on the main stage and has performed reasonably well.

big loser: Harper. Lost the vote, again. The registry's never going away Steevo. Get used to it.

loser: Ignatieff. Even though you won the vote, you still alienated a bloc of voters, and you were out-classed by Layton. Jack Layton. Deal with that.

losers: anybody who changed their vote. Spineless wusses.

loser: Niki Ashton, for not saying how you were going to vote. You went from being open-minded and thoughtful to indecisive and annoying. Were you waiting for bribes? I ditto Policy Frog's tweet.


Where do I stand? The Anybody Want A Peanut public policy and cocktail mixing department (I had to consolidate due to cut-backs) has not provided me with a report yet, so I don't know what to think. The bastards are probably too busy drinking mojitos. I look at it from a cost/benefit perspective. A registry per se is not a bad idea, but is it worth all the money we're pumping into it? I can't answer that question.


John Dobbin said...

Think I have to disagree that Layton was the winner. The polls show Layton was hurt this last month for trying to appeal to both sides. While he was afraid his rural MPs would be targeted, his urban MPs lost support and in Quebec both the NDP and the Tories were seen as putting the registry in jeopardy.

The NDP was squeezed all summer because they tried not to have an official policy on the registry.

The Liberals, if anything are neutral in gains and losses. They would have done poorly if the registry failed on their account though.

The Tories are winners with their base. It won't gain them seats in Quebec. It is hard to say if it gains them seats in rural areas.

As far as the registry goes, I think I will have to go with the Auditor that the program is fiscally well run now and I will go with the police that it is a tool that has helped them track killers such as the person who killed four RCMP officers.

Anonymous said...

Jack Layton may appear the cool compromise guy, but you have to know behind the scenes he was "whipping" his members by two ways: threats of losing shadow cabinet jobs; being ostracized by fellow NDP MPs. That is why spineless NDPers like Peter Stoffer changed sides. Fear. I don't think Harper is the loser here. It will give him votes in rural areas such as northern Ontario, split the left up there. I do think you're right that the registry will never disappear. Too many Canadians base their support on emotional issues. Any objective analysis can prove that registering long guns won't prevent long-gun crimes. But again, it's emotional, sentimental for people. Part of the myth of the "gun-hating" Canadian. Something like the blue-helmeted Canadian soldier. It's all emotion and PR. Oh, and Candice Hoeppner is going places -- she's a winner either way.

Anonymous said...

Why can't the conservatives just cut the funding to it like they can other things and make it even less effective until it collapses???

cherenkov said...

@John: Polls. Pfft. I'll listen to my own intuition. Admittedly it's usually wrong, but how interesting would this blog be if I always agreed with the polls?

@Anon1: Oh ya no doubt he was leaning hard on his MPs, but at least he appeared to have some flexibility and appearances are important.

Agreed that Harper probably came out of this OK. Yes I called him a loser, but Toronto is pretty much a write-off for him anyhow. he took on the issue, which is what his base expects.

@Anon2: kind of like how I broke off relationships in University. Cut off the phone calls until it collapses. I feel kind of bad about it now.

Anonymous said...

Cherenkov you're the man. The best blogger in Winnipeg by far. You have the guts to respond to us anonymous posters and you are always classy about it. Keep it up! (No I am not related to Cherenkov, I don't even know who he is.)

cherenkov said...

Thanks Mom!

GWiz said...

I don't agree with Harper and Co. on much but the Gun Registry irks the hell out of me. The saddest thing about it, other than the wasted money, is that it actual makes more of the criminals now buy/get handguns which are just as "illegal" but a lot easier to conseal and USE in crimes. Think about it. I've never seen so much crime, killings and robberies, involving handguns as I see and hear about now, since the longgun registry was instituted.

Marginalized Action Dinosaur said...

According to stats can murder rates with firearms are up 24% since the dawn of the registry, up. not down.

Is letting criminals know the liberals want to give them a safe working environment costing 40-50 lives a year?

“There were 200 homicides committed with a firearm in 2008, 12 more than in 2007. The rate of homicides committed with a firearm has increased 24% since 2002.“!!!!!!!!!


As for it being a useful tool for police,

There's a lot of quotes at the link that say otherwise.

In fact when I went to the police on pembina they said they don't care much about it,

when I talked to them down town at the public safety building the constible at the desk had to have it explained to him by the Sergeant because he never even heard of it. I it was a useful tool someone doing public service in the largest police station in the city should have heard of it.

so unlike the hells angels I can do 2 years in jail for not registering when I move.

I took over a year to change address, but they said we don't care much about the registry. So they didn't take me in.

but hey they have the right to come into my house without a warrant unlike drug dealers and members of the Indian posse so it's all good.

Is it 2% of all crimes are done with registered weapons. Why worry about the other 98%

Australia and the UK have done similar things with dismal results but it's not about crime control thats why they don't care when it fails. Its not about saving lives its about hating guns.

John Dobbin said...


Your own stats say it is handguns that have seen an increase, not long guns. Does this mean you want the end of the Firearm's Certificate because it doesn't help reduce hand gun crimes? This is the goal of conservatives, right? It is to end all gun laws because they don't stop crime?

Increasing police in Manitoba doesn't seem to stop crime either. Does that mean, we should end the police?

/* Google Tracker Code