Well I like the picture, a Webely .455 British Army service revolver that appears to be converted to fire .45ACP. I have one still in .455, each bullet cost $1 and are very hard to find, but it is fun to shoot a gun that is nearly 100 years old.

This group has been investigated by the RCMP for the possible misuse of approx $500,000 in Government grants along with a lobbyist with the name Dora who was fairly high in the Liberal party (If I remember correctly) Imagine that, the government giving money to crate the “demand” for the registry which is now rumoured to cost over 2 billion (wait for the AG report May 16th)

Other than the oops about the 50% of the guns in crime being stolen, I am pleased at the amount of preparation that they put into this, makes a change from most of the garbage spewed about firearms in the media.

Wendy Cukier was a Liberal paid lobbyist. Imagine that, the Liberals paid this professional lobbyist to lobby them. She knows full well that most of what she spouted was nonsense at best, and lies for the most part, but hey, it paid the bills and got her face time with the media. I'm no fan of Harper, but I applaud his plan to dismantle the gun registry. 2 Billion of our tax dollars flushed down the toilet on an utterly useless registry that did zero for preventing firearms crimes. You think Joe Taxpayer was upset about the "billion dollar boondoggle" at HRDC? Maybe a tad peeved over the sponsorship scandal? Just wait until he learns about the waste and mismanagement at the gun registry. Be prepared for real anger.

and this:

It would be kind of nice to have some actual evidence to support contentions like these. Is it actually true that the border computers will not have high-speed internet access? Even if they don't, is the database they are accessing updated so frequently that high-speed internet is even a concern?

Almost everything in the story is anecdote and conjecture - most of it from spokespeople who have an axe to grind, imo.

In a way all these stories about guns are a complete waste of time. Even if the registry had been perfect - and it obviously wasn't - a vocal minority had decided to subvert it from the beginning. Once Harper was elected it was toast.

The vast majority of Canadians don't want guns proliferating, especially in cities. For the next few years, sensible people will try as best they can to make that point as often and as effectively as they can.

Isn’t it wonderful that in a democracy a “vocal minority” can be heard over the politically correct mob, and protect themselves against persecution.

The registry was flawed from the beginning and created for political purposes, not for real issues. Throwing money at it did not solve the problems and yet you want to throw more money at it?

Do you feel safer that it took them over 2 years to register my .22 rifle I have had since I was a kid?

As for the database, the webpage designer for the CFC had reported the flaws in the systems a long time ago and showed a TV crew how to do it, the CFC changed their system shortly thereafter.

One of the biggest common complaints throughout the Federal Government departments is the lack of computer resources & support in the remote areas. The Liberals made big promise to build more fibre-optics lines to remote communities, but then sucked the money out of the program. I am no fan of the border Services, but I know from the personal experience of working with them that outside of the major crossings, their systems suck.

As one of the CPC politicians said, we are going after the Hells Angels, not Ducks Unlimited.

Keep in mind that organized crime does not need to hack into the database either, they can either place one of their own in the system or blackmail/bribe someone already within to provide the data and the RCMP have already had that problem with clerical staff that were connected to biker gangs.

The gun registry was an excellent example of a government boondoggle. Given the cost overruns, it appears to have been rife with corruption (wasn't it set up by the Dept. of Justice... lawyers... ah that explains it).

That said, there is no reason a registry can't be done cost effectively. They do it for motor vehicle license and registration.

In other words, Colin, the hacking isn't really an issue and has only been billed that way to make a political point; and, so far as access to the database is concerned, high speed access may not be a problem either. The story sucks.

I'll agree the way the long-gun registry was handled was grossly incompetent if you'll agree that there was never any intention on the part of the gun lobby to work within the system. Clearly some of the problems are a function of two groups of idiots sniping away at each other - neither one of them particularly good examples of democracy in action.

I expect Pee wee will be transferring most of these responsibilities to the provinces soon so the Yahoos can continue with their project of turning Alberta into an amalgam of Texas and Oklahoma anyway.

No the hacking is an issue, just that the organized crime groups have more than one way to access data. The fact that they collect sensitive information and do not take appropriate steps to protect it from electronic and Human access is the real problem

The only purpose the gun registry serves is to enable eventual confiscation, as shown by Martians handgun ban during the election.

The Firearms Act was brought in for political purposes. The government cut the shooting community out of the process and cherry picked advice from those they liked. Despite warnings from the shooting community that the system could not pay for itself and would be a security risk, they went ahead. Now the shooting community has been proven correct. Had the government listened to that community they could have come up with a law that protects the general public and the shooting community, which at approx. 4 million+ is a significant chunk of the population.

James
Remember that the vehicle licensing program require considerable resources from all of the Provincial and territorial governments.

If the purpose of the registry was only to save lives, the 2 billion could have been far more effective in other programs. While this boondoggle was sucking taxpayer money out of the treasury, CoastGuard rescue boats were tied up because of a lack of money to buy fuel and pro-active police programs were cut. Lots of programs could have used the money. If you believe the registry was there to save lives, you are seriously fooling yourself.

So what does this statement mean? You can't have it both ways.

Surely you can't pretend that the shooting 'community' (that's an oxymoron if ever I heard one - it was a political lobby, nothing more) didn't do everything it could to subvert the system? Which was the point I was trying to make.
I acknowledged the system and its implementation were flawed.

As for the shibboleth of confiscation, spare me!

That would be because BC is using the RCMP for all functions, while Ontario has wisely kept their Provincial Police force intact. This has allowed the OPP to act on intelligent initiatives that become stuck in the RCMP higher bureaucracy. Moreover such thing as this sort of focus action do not resonate all over the country, so they are not deemed 'good enough' to warrant attention from the Federal Minister.

While I much appreciate the general thrust of Kootowls main comments above, I just wanted to make clear that I do not advocate for us all to be running around armed to the teeth. That will not make us one jit safer, as neocon Colin seems to think and advocate, but merely create an even more US-like competitive atmosphere of heightened danger and risk in our society. I merely point out, owning a car myself, that autos kill way more people than guns, even in the US, and if "public safety" is the only consideration, we would be better to outlaw automobiles-, which might certainly be usefully done within the boundaries of mega-cities like Vancouver for sure. :-)

On the other hands this heightened fear being raised about guns per se is not yet at least a major issue in this country, nor is it the main problem within society anywhere that I know of. The problem is less guns and more people and the kind of greed driven and highly competitive, rather than cooperative and democratic based, society and economic model we have opted for and allowed to evolve and take controlling root amongst us. It is that which has to be dealt with, in order to substantially root out the growing need folks seem to feel, to turn to guns to secure their interests and feeling of "safety"-, as contradictory as that may seem.

Law and order wingnuts merely attempt to divert our attention away from this more important point by waving the spectre of "guns" around and at us-, knowing full well that in the presence of a gun, that is all that folks really see-, not even the face, let alone the driving forces beneath the surface of its wielder. They want you to focus on the highly charged issue of the gun, not the other elements at work around it that actually make it so damned dangerous, and bring it to the fore as "the tool of choice" for many.

I say, pay attention to the social and economic issues that interact with and through that friggin' gun, if you really want to understand it and strike to the heart of the underlying problem these wingnut folks would rather you were diverted from and ignored.

There may be an error in this statement, for were the CBSA given these powers by an administrative Order they do not carry the same weight as an Order in Council.

The writers may wish to research this little factoid before complaining.

However, if the Order in Council was issued, then the Chief Operating Officer of the CBSA should now have a seat at the Treasury Board table and have access to the funds neccesary to enact the Order in Council.

If this has been an administrative order (issued by a clerk) then the CBSA has the right to ignore it and their border duties, as we have seen them do recently - passing them onto the shoulders of the RCMP, the body that has the responsibility to enforce the Criminal Code of Canada.

The nature of the information flow in CPIC system is both long-term and short-notice.

Much of the long-term stuff is what the CBSA will be using, so dial-up is fine for that.

The potentially dangerous and opportunities to 'catch' any sort of border smuggler comes from the short-notice materials.

We saw this at the peace arch crossing last year, where there are high-speed connection computers, linked to a law-enforcement system from the US.

The border guards ran away.

Given that performance, why would the US counterparts want to share any more information at all? This is where the frustration wall gets built.

If all the smaller crossings were to get only dial-up access, why not just give them Nintendo's or X-boxes so that they can at least be better entertained than 'solitaire'?

There is no point, and the nervous laughter of the border officials points to the nasty reality of their position.

Coyote wrote:

so those Law and order wingnuts would be in the LIEberal Party that made the gun registry mess?

Coyote- Generally agree with you but not on this one. If you really check back on Cukier's raison d'etre, she is shown to be a single issue type. She grabbed hold of a horrible event, ran it up the flagpole, and the media and politicians fell into the trap. If you were to ask who Marc Lepine is I'm sure most people would get it right. If you were to ask most people to give a single name of one of those students, very few could do it. When another horrible incident occurs, and unfortunately it will, what can be banned to "protect" us. Look south to see what banning illegal aliens, a war on drugs, a war on poverty and on and on has done. The registry will never accomplish what it's proponents said it would. And by the way- I'm not in favour of the US style of gun law either, so don't even bother.

Colin wrote:

G West continues to miss the point:

Mr. Dithers, ahh Martin, while attempting to take off like a helicopter with his arms flailing about him (like many parts of the LIEberal party in the last election campaign), went on about first banning, then with equal force waxed about confiscation of the offending firearms.

This is exactly what was said about the long-arm registry, that once a certain critical mass was reached those weapons would simply be confiscated - with no legal recourse, no compensation and to no good end.

For some evidence of this please read, no really G WEST read it:

http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=8073

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,18950031-7583,00.html

http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/NationalPost61504.html

http://www.gunowners.org/sk0703.htm

The Australian and Japanese experience shows that diverse cultures have had the same general response to these actions.

I suspect that Canada would be no different.

Just imagine what $2 Billion would have done for more basic services that you, G WEST, or Coyote would have preferred?

murdock
You still refuse to read what I've been posting. If you expect me to pay any more attention to australian tripe than I do to the noxious emanations of Fox news and canwest globall
you really haven't been paying attention. As far as i'm concerned any handgun melted down and turned into something really useful like a shovel, is a good idea...

G: Heh heh heh ... slaps knee ... good one!

"The registry will never accomplish what it's proponents said it would. And by the way- I'm not in favour of the US style of gun law either, so don't even bother." hunter.

Well, I certainly agree that the gun registry, which will only get the "honest" owners of guns, "will never accomplish what its proponents said it would." (And I have two "registered" guns.) On that we are agreed.

The gun registry is an attemtp by politicians again, in response to a highly tragic and emotional event which reflects some of those social realities and attitudes of which I spoke, to make it look like they are really doing something when they are not. That said, I consider the registry of "legal" guns, which is all that will be therein,"legal" guns, when we know they are not the majority guns of choice where they are used in the commission of crime, though an unnecessary and costly exercise, to be still otherwise a fairly harmless/innocuous bureaucratic imposition. My view.

It is certainly not an issue I would go to the wall over. (The greater likelihood is, it is going to fall of its own cost and bureaucratic weight anyway. In this "cutbacks" capitalist environment, almost a certainty.)

Like I say, I have two "registered guns". Were I seriously contemplating a crime however, or an insurrection, I think it is fairly clear these would not be my weapons of choice-, but such "unregistered and illegal weapons" as there will certainly be a market for and manufacturers of, prepared to sell even to me, given the nature of capitalism.

So we are not as disagreed as you might think or it appear.

My position merely says, that it is within the nature of a highly competitive society and what it does to people, that resides the real problem which arises with guns. The rest is so much smoke and mirrors. Again, my view.

You want to reduce the risks posed by "illegal" guns and the "criminals" who use them, which is the real problem, address the problems of inequality, poverty, insecurity and estrangement that walk hand in hand with the nature of highly competitive capitalism, and is its buttfuk bedfellow.

Guns don't point and shoot themselves off. Outlaw them and change nothing else in the equation, other forms of murder and mayhem will but appear to take its place, perhaps even more ghastly. Guns are not the problem per se-, though I do not think as a result we need or should allow folks to walk around our streets armed to the teeth either. Not in this highly competitive and macho capitalist environment, for sure. No, not ever.

Mostly, I just don't want the only ones in possession of guns and a license to kill, to be The State and its armed police, security and military forces. Not with my politics. :-) When and if they become a problem, I want to be able to secure a gun myself, and would do so whether they be legal or not. It's a big world out there, in which it is possible to hide almost anything, assuming resourceful people. :-)

As for hunting, my weapon of choice is my own handmade flatbow and arrows. 8-D LOL Even then, my practice is only "near miss", just as a way to say, I could have done it, needed I the meat. :-) It keeps the manly art of stalking and stealth sharpened. (Talking critters, not ladies.)

And eh, I am very much a peace loving and reasonable man, more given to loving than fighting. I'm just not a fool either.

Thanks Coyote- Never crossed my mind that you are or ever have been a fool. Too bad the flaming idiots that gifted us with the registry could think rationally. Think how that wasted money could have benefitted people that really needed it.

so then Coyote, what would you have to say if tomorrow the Queens' Cowboys came to your front door and demanded the guns?

This is what the opposition to the registry has had to say all along.

for G West, when the crime wave reaches your home, I hope your shovel can stop it for your sake.

sez murdock as he slaps another fish onto the floor!

G west wrote:

G west, normally you are more measured in your statements, but you are way off the mark on this one. The various shooting communities (who receive no government grants) in Canada were fractured and opened to the “divide and conquer” routine of their well funded and political opponents. It’s only recently that with the help of Internet sites and forums have the groups been able to come together and act like a community.

Coyote is correct, a gun is merely a tool, in the hands of someone responsible it is not any greater a threat to anyone than a hammer or machete. Most of the drive to limit and ban guns in Canada is driven by politician that wanted a easy platform to gain votes.

Yes I do support people having the right to carry firearms for defence, far more useful than all those restraining orders that get issued. Not everyone is going to rush out get their licence, take the training, buy a gun, care for it, carry it and stay abreast of the regulations to do so. Right now there are approx. 7000 carry permits issued in Canada, I don’t know if any have been abused, but so far the streets have not run with blood. The police, despite the best efforts of the on-duty cops are not there to prevent you from being harmed, they are to document the crime and arrest the person(s) after the fact, they also try to prevent the crimes from taking place. If you are in a life or death struggle with someone that intends you or loved ones harm, you are on your own. The type of people that do try to harm others are generally more physically and mentally prepared for than their target.

murdock
I won't be too worried. I actually know what the crime statistics are and anyway, I'm more concerned about the fact that people like you might be able to get their hands on a gun legally. Like our soldiers in Afghanistan, a lot of innocent people end up succumbing to friendly fire.

Right Colin, and it's the Tools who use them in many cases that have me worried.
I went though a development stage in my early teens and did the usual plinking with a 22 and some minor varmint hunting - I grew out of it when one of my schoolmates used a 22 on his own head in a fit of adolescent depression. That has a way of making you reconsider your affection for guns as tools. When people start beating themselves and others to death with shovels, let me know and I'll climb on that bandwagon. In the meantime, as I told murdock, go back and read what I wrote and don't accuse me of being an apologist for the gun registry.

G West retorts:

I never did such a thing.

I did and continue to point out that the gun-registry is just a repository of addresses for those whom would take those weapons away.

Whether they are RCMP, part of the group that Coyote distrusts, or Hells Angels matters not, since I think both groups have access to the same list.

That is part of what the article pointed out, that the information collected by governments cannot be considered secure in any way whatsoever.

murdock
You implied that I was in complicit agreement with an imaginary plan to take somebody's guns away. You also implied I was in danger of being mowed down in an incipient crime wave.

I'm a lot less sanguine about someone like you having a gun than I am about any possible bad consequences of the fact that gun owners’ names and addresses are on file somewhere.

Anyone as deluded and conspiratorially-minded as your posts to this site indicate you may be shouldn't be trusted with anything more lethal than a pen knife.

lol 8-D Good response to Murdock and his fish, GWest.

Differences exist amongst those on the left about many things brother, and some of us will also about guns. Everything in good time, and with rational and reasoned discussion my friend. They are not going to divide us with this one. :-)

Fer chris'sake man, the "crime wave" has already reached every working class door. It's called capitalism, wearing its new neoconazi face. It's everywhere, bold enough to not be wearing a mask (yet), and engaged in its crimes along a broad front, but especially the economy, and in criminal alliance with Amerikkkan Imperialism.

But some of us at least are onto it and not fooled by the red herring issues it drags amongst us, to again as it always does, seek to play one of us against the others. This is a tactic certainly, with which the entire working class should by now be familiar.

When and if we ever really have need of guns Murdock, and hopefully we never will, which much depends on your types and your political State, they are always gettable, legal or illegal, with a registry or without. This is free enterprise capitalism afterall.. There is always one of you who will sell his soul and his class to turn a fast buck eh!

What the fuk makes you think you are the only ones who really understand current capitalism? The only real difference between us is you buy into it and apologize for it. We have been here since it put on its new, more fascist face since the late '70s as well. :-) (Actually, that face has always really been there, its real face, behind the mask of socialized "liberal capitalism" it wore for awhile, through the "prosperity capitalism" period. It fooled much of the trade union bureaucracy and even the masses, of course, who wanted to "believe", but others of us it never did. We always knew.:-)

Its the same old same O. Urban and Rural issues are night and day from each other in terms of how the Feds should legislate. Why control long guns? Shot guns? Its the aussies and hand guns that are killing people. No one uses a long gun in the city. Too impractical and obvious. And in the country, its just not a crime issue. Was registration of long guns impractical? Without question. Typical polarized, extreme, all or nothing dumbassed logic.

The governments of yesterday and today just didn't think this one through. We are now going to have another gun money drain and this time, its the Cons. 200 million for more guns for the guys at the border. Do we need them? Are we really right to send this kind of message? And in the area of sociology and phyc, don't guns attract guns? Guns at the border are still unnecessary, I think, at this point.

And getting back to this so called Harperized "boondoggle" gun registry, 750 million of the 1.9 billion cost overrun went to a central comp system to run it. Pretty darn pricy. Minus another 200 million in court challenges by gun lobby groups and organizations like the NCC, and were down to a billion dollar cost overrun spread out over 10 years. Still way to expensive.

To me, its a hidden RCMP subsidy. And this talk about CPIC being so easy to penetrate... it was more than guns that anyone could find out. Try everything under the sun, including criminal records, dependants and adresses.

To blame CPIC lack of security on the gun registry is a bit much. It was around long before the gun registry, and just as easily accessible. But most of this is the past. The money has been spent and unrecoverable. The gun registry costs are becoming more and more streamlined. Its just not the black hole it used to be. But this 200 million for guns for the borders... and the extra money in the Con budget for more police, prosecutors and jails, with bumped up minimum sentencing.

The death penalty for serial murderers and castoration for serial rapists would go a long way to saving jail costs. Busting someone for a roach joint sure won't.

Coyote, I like the cut of your jib. :-)

LOL 8-D And good to read you too, brother.

And being an old Saskatchewan boy myself, I still ain't met too many folks from old Saskabush I don't like. My family farmed around McTaggart and Yellow Grass there. I was born in Moose Jaw myself. (Found myself on the coast in the navy, and liked what this one particular lady was offering me, so I stayed.:-)

Hopefully, we'll hear more often from you here. :-)

You know it, brother. Eastend Sask, myself (cypress hills area) born and raised. Most folks around these parts are good people too, accept maybe the odd MOFO that screws their neighbor for a land broke one acre expired road allowance lease, petty things like that. (funny how peace'll turn to war on the drop of a dime)

All in all, farming is what it is. A way of life, providing for your kids (if you're a smart farmer and plant your seeds in moisture, 8-D), an old fashioned high stakes guessing game on the weather and the grain and oilseed markets and where that next cheap auction might be to pick up something for the next generation to come.

Looking to hear more from yourself, as well, Coyote. :-) Them fuggin Cons don't know Jack from the cracks on their asses, I swear all thats savin their asses is their glasses, friggin zero's. (it sure aint gun control.)

They'll never catch on. "Oh, look! Look at my stock portfolio! My oil, gold and chemical stocks made me so rich!!" None of them stop to think of the cost to the environment and to the life our environments support, including their own. None of them think, "hey, this or that country and its labour and life might have gotten a little exploited, or... global warming might give us malanoma! Why is my love affair with plasic shrivelling my nuts and making me grow breasts?" (for a start) Friggin losers.

Like fatherless fathers, like fatherless sons. In the end, their nothin but nutless steers. Its the birth of death or the death of birth, take your pick. Some of these poor bastards think their rich, for crying out loud. Friggin zero's.

Most of their wives are pilled out and their kids are choking on silver spoons with egos built on hand me downs, sittin on lumps of cancer in their colons and they think their rich. Quite the fantasy competing with the Jones like good little corporate consumers that they are. And consumption? Aint no such thing. Only depletion, conversion or change. About the only thing Cons are good for is converting food into shit, but we've already got lots of pigs and cows for that. Friggin wastes of skin.

When these Republican/Con capitalist extremist war monger religious hypocrite fakes finally use and RESPECT the meaning to the words "sustainability" and "accountability" the early beginnings of humility might actually give a few of them a chance for change... change into something else other than just another deluded rapist of our mother Earth. As for the rest of the trash out there, Coyote... if this farmer had to reap what they sow, I'd sooner light a match on the whole weed pile and be done with it, save the odd seed for futures. (I know, I know, its all in the software and ideology upstairs, after all, which is why I say "come on over to my place and check out how I control my guns!") Maybe save some gophers for some dietary testing, if G West doesn't shoot 'em all, lol.

Sask. Farmer
You can relax with the knowledge that your paranoia is in your head. Perhaps you have been reading too many posts from the mangy dog.
Take a step back and look over the border to your western neighbor for lessons on how it should be done.
You aren't David Orchard are you ?
The home of Tommy Douglas is still in the dark ages due to your NDP losers running your Province. No wonder you aren't happy.
Does the word 'minority' apply to you and your Western socialists apply ?

The only problem we've had in Sask is Grant Divine's 14 MLA's charged (one shot himself after getting caught knowing he was going to do time) with theft of public funds, and 16.5 billion dollars of debt over 10 years for 750,000 Saskatchewanites to pay off (Devine started with 1.1 million and a province in the black, but had 350,000 people leave the province to live elsewhere during Devines ruin and corruption). I believe Divine was an inept Con, something like yourself. Some hasbeen blowhard who knew nothing about anything, other than how to privatize every successful crown corp that ever worked, run massive debt, and call it successful.

As for Harper being a U.S. bought western separatist sellout... you fuggin A, asswipe. Only a complete buffoon like yourself couldn't see it. There just happens to be, dipshit, the way we want it to be, and the way it actually is. If anyone is deluded, slowpoke... its you.

And do I have to be nice about calling a spade a spade? Nope. Not once. Blowing kisses just don't work with numbskulls like yourself so if you don't like it, too friggin bad. Its not my fault your too lame to get it.

Duncan
As I recall, even Harper wouldn't have Devine as a neo conman candidate in the 2005 election. Don't mean to correct you Duncan, but wasn't it actually worse than that. I thought there were 21 charges and 16 convictions. And Grant, (for whom the 'clueless' label would have been most apt) Devine pretended he didn't know a thing about it. One of the most corrupt governments in Canadian history and you're still paying the bills for their malfeasance.

There's a lot of speculation about what the Basi/Virk trial, which starts on June 6 I think, will reveal about the state of corruption in the Government here in BC.

Thanks for the correction, G. I'm with your numbers concerning MLA's. I must confess, I was paying more attention to the deficit and population numbers back in the day, that to this day, give Saskatchewan residents more debt per capita than Quebec and thats saying something cause they've had their share of corrupt governments as well. I believe their deficit now stands at 117 billion with roughly 7.5 million people. Sask residents now have a the highest provincial debtload in Canada, thanks solely to IMAC's beloved Con governments.

IMAC's lack of political Sask. history concerning his last post is so revealing as to just how clued out he is, that there is no fun in putting a dummy like this in his place. It stirs up too many bad memories of just how ugly a corrupt Conservative government can get. The Lib fed scandal was peanuts compared to what Devine & Co stole. People will talk about Montgomery like its big money, and our latest Con softwood fiasco just dwarfed it 7 times over without people batting an eye, were so asleep.

Anyone who lived in Sask. through Devine's gov. (with Mulroney no less) knows why the Cons have to change their name (again as usual, this time to "the Sask. Party") to stand a hope in hell of getting provincially elected.

As for Campbell's corruption, its my belief that he's even more ideologically corrupt than he is morally or financially. His handouts to his family and friends in healthcare and fish farms should be well known by now, but its not.

You guys have had it rough up there in BC. Teresen, BC rail, Christ, they were auctioning off ferry routes without any debate at all when the ferry when down. The BC Campbell gameplan this entire time has been to privatize crowns to the U.S. (for shares and/or cash bribes, naturally) and slash the environment, social programs and anything else that looks like work. Don't be surprized if BC Hydro is next. If I lived there, I'd be pissed, G.

"Blowing kisses just don't work with numbskulls like yourself so if you don't like it, too friggin bad." Duncan.

LOL. And I'm liking the cut of your jib as well, brother. Though these wingnuts should be used to the abuse and scorn heaped on them here by now. :-) They do continue to whine so under the lash however.

If you're able, maybe pay attention to a trial coming up here, I think its this month, involving a couple of government insider bootlicks, Bob Vasi and David Virk. It may turn out to be a whitewash, given the way the State and its legal system have been hiding and manipulating the evidence that's being made available to the public, but on the other hand, it could be very interesting despite their best efforts. (These are two guys, in the search claims made in the original warrents, who have been handing out sundry favours from their party insiders and privileged information positions, in exchange for cash and cushy Liberal Party jobs, and who were apparently involved as well in giving illegal info to the original US bidder with an early inside track, in the sale of the assets of BC Rail. Which, as one of the consequences of the shenanigans of these two, eventually wound up in the hands of the scarcely less corrupt CNR.) More "public assets" being handed off as virtual give-aways to benefit the sacred ruling class "private sector".)

Check out this site, if you're of a mind:

http://houseofinfamy.blogspot.com/

Anyway, it has the potential to be a window into this entire "privatization" bullshit which the BC citizenry have been tolerating for too long already.

And they've already tried it with Hydro, but got their hands slapped by alarmed public opinion. Currently, they're just biding their time for another opportunity to pour it off into the corporate "private sector" slop trough.

Maybe something could be done about it if folks could see beyond the emotional red herring issues they trot out periodically, like all the diversionary shitt around so-called "gun registration" here. It's one of those seeing the forest for all the trees issues that folks sometimes have so much trouble with.

They've been the pupper masters for a long time, this ruling class serving crew, and they do know how to jerk those strings to get us all twitching in just the right direction. One does have to give them some credit.

Anyway Dunc, interesting to read you. The original homestead for my family, when they first fled the then prevailing working class poverty of Scotland, is in fact in the Cypress Hills country, just north and west of Maple Creek if I remember correctly-, still in the hands of some cousin now many times removed I believe. I worked on farms in a number of places around Sask. as a lad, and have farmed and ranched here in BC-, including as a hired hand on the biggest cattle ranch here, the Douglas Lake Cattle Co.. So I have some familiarity with the life-, and still, a soft spot for old Saskatchewan which I regularly visit to see family.

A good day to ya.

I'm away for the day folks. Catch y'all later. :-)

G west
I am sorry about your friend, I have also had friends lost to suicide and used to have to work on those that survived jumping off bridges, suicide is an important but separate issue. The use of firearms for suicide is down, but the numbers of suicides have stayed the same.

I was more annoyed with your “political lobby” comment, than considering you an “apologist” I think you realized that the registry it is not a good benefit for the money. To use the term “political lobbyist” makes people think that a bunch of pin stripes suits backed by big business is behind it. In actually fact it is individuals who have sacrificed a lot of personal time and money to fight these challenges, backed up by private firearm owners donating $25 or $50 whenever they can. It’s is a real grassroots affair.

Duncan seems to be complaining that legal challenges and civil disobedience is part of the reason for cost overruns in the program, gee it’s a rough world when people don’t like their rights being trampled and fight back. How about how much it has cost people personally to fight the government?

It’s not the black hole that is was, well that’s nice, it’s now only a dark brown, murky hole sucking up money at moderately alarming rate, like the recent proposal for a 275 million computer upgrade, despite the spending cap that was announced by the Liberals. Rumour have it that the AG’s report will be scathing on this program. Personal I don’t think this was so much a RCMP slush fund as it was a Liberal Party supporter slush fund.

Granted the CIPIC suffers from the need to be fairly open to be effective, but there are systems to prevent available to prevent “browsing”. When you collect sensitive data, you take on the responsibility to protect it, if you are not willing to do so, then don’t compile it. The money still can be used for far more useful things.

Coyote
I always had a lot of respect for bow hunters, it takes a lot of patience to get that close.

Colin
What phony baloney Colin; you couldn’t care less for anything but your own tight little militaristic ass.

I never cared for the long gun registry but I have enough empathy for people who live in cities to understand that a program which was stupid for rural areas may have been very important for people in cities.

The bureaucrats really screwed it up but it wasn't the first time and it won't be the last. Democracy is a messy imperfect business as Pee Wee is beginning to learn: Ginger groups like the gun lobby are often one issue thugs and a lot of the people I know who talk about how important their guns are to their daily life are wearing their Stetsons way too tight. Both sides in this mess deserve a black eye in my view and that's all I ever said - the gun owners were hell bent to subvert the gun registry from the beginning and they did everything they could to make it ineffective and costly. It was a classic pissing match from the beginning - nothing more, nothing less.

I hate handguns, always have, and always will. For the less than 1% of the population who want to target shoot and legitimate peace officers I'm willing to tolerate the hateful things and trust their (in my opinion, questionable) judgment. As for the rest of people who define their masculinity by the caliber of their shootin' iron, they belong in the old west - I wish they'd all move to Alberta and enjoy themselves.

Ha! how you were able to divine the circumference of my posterior from posts on a discussion forum will make a quite interesting mathematical formula, I would love to see it.

Seriously though, having watched people fling themselves off bridges and then pulled them out of the water and try to keep them alive, tends to make you feel for anyone that loses someone this way. Suicide (except on a few occasions) is truly the most selfless act you can do. It harms the people close to you and those who care, the ripples of that act carry on in the lives of the people affected. One friend that took his life would have been a great cartoonist, still have his rough copies in a box.

Not a very “inclusive statement” what happened to culturally diversity? Or am I supposed to humbly submit my desire and wishes to the “Central Committee for Permitted Activities” for approval? Funny how the people who argue for the “marginalized” are quick to take away the rights of anyone they disagree with.

there are a lot of things I hate, but I don't go around forcing my wishes on people.

colin
I think my attitude was far more tolerant than yours. I allowed for target shooters and legitimate peace officers; in which group I take it you'd fall. Who else needs a hand gun? I don't encourage people who want to keep cobras in their back yard either. As for the tight ass, I assumed you’d know what a metaphor was.
Further, on the point of tolerance; I’d suggest you cast your mind back a month or so to another incident on these pages when your capacity for tolerance wore a little thin too.
Remember?

As for long guns and the rural/urban dichotomy I've already acknowledged that. In terms of tolerance though, you certainly have no lessons to teach anyone. I don't consider guns qualify as a culture since frontier days and nobody misses them very much. I never argued for taking away anyone's rights. If the target shooters and the peace officers of this fair land amount to more than 1% of the population let me know and I'll revise my estimate of those who actually 'need' handguns for their entertainment and recreation. That is what this is all about anyway.

Once again, when people bashing themselves and each other to death with other tools becomes a serious hazard to life and limb let me know about that and I'll join your club to ban them.

Do you really think the vaste majority of the 200 million in court costs came from simple folk like you and I and not gun lobbiest groups that are U.S. led, particularly by gun manufacturers and groups like the NCC? Get your facts straight before running your mouth off.

Duh!! (what a hard rumor to start)

Prove it.

You either misspelled, or your on glue. It happens to be a rather cowardly and selfish act, in my opinion. And just to put it into perspective, everyone blows it. If we were judged solely by one specific act in our lives, there wouldn't be one of us worthy of breathing past the age of 20.

I did misspell, I meant selfish, thanks at least we agree on one thing, although I won't use cowardly to describe it.

As for the slush fund, why would the RCMP waste their time if something wasn't fishy. the lobbyist was directly connected with the Liberal Party, lets just say their credibility is in doubt.

and which Canadian gun manufactures would that be? Para-Ordance mostly ignores the Canadian market and Demieco is interested only in government contracts, we are just to small of a market for them to get excited about.

The NRA has given moral support and guidances as to fight gun laws, but Canada is not their bailiwick and will not be spending much on fighting Canadian laws. I personal know several people that aren’t rich by any means that have donated over $1,000 dollars to the NFA and CSSA. The anti’s can’t stand the fact that it is a grassroots movement.

As I noted in the other gun thread, when grown men with money proudly wear the H.A. colours, and in effect glorify the actions of gun-runners, thieves and extortionists, you're looking at another aspect of the same problem.

Outlaws indeed. Real outlaws carry a bow and arrow. :-) Losers with phallic paranoia that will never be happy no matter how much black leather they wear or how many horsepower they straddle.

Very true, amazing how many people who I met that think they are just nice guys having fun. They do have a good PR machine.

Some fine posts here. Others, well, not so fine....

As a relative newcomer to reading political blogs I'm noticing that there's a parallel universe of NDP and Conservative blogs. They have something in common at a pretty deep level: Alongside plenty of thoughtful, reasonable posters, a profusion of intolerant ranters whose vitriolic souls make me shudder.

There are many reasonable, decent, thoughtful folks, of course, right here on this blog and on most others. Yet the commonness of koolaid-swallowing ideologues who seem to automatically despise anyone who doesn't subscribe to their particular flavor of pre-packaged, swallowed-whole ranter-memes does worry me.

Canada -- luckily -- has a cultural norm of deference and politesse, so we tend to assume Candians are reasonable, tolerant, non-ideological people. Many are. Many aren't. The commonness of ranters on Canadian blogs reveals a profusion of ugly little brownshirty souls (whether of the 'right' or 'left' -- whatever those cliched labels really signify). Our state of grace is that by custom, our Canadian **********-souls aren't allowed free play out in the real world.

Wondering if you're a ranter? Try this: If you're really sure of all your political views and despise the views and even the persons of people who don't agree with you, and tend to label them -- openly or in the privacy of your mind -- as idiots and assholes, then, yep, you're a ranter.

Not that they're "your" views anyway, really -- you bought them off a dead ranter someplace, as part of a big-ass package deal. You utter "your" views whenever your buttons are pushed by hearing a word like "politics" just as reliably as a Coke machine spits out an aluminum can filled with sugar solution after you put a loonie in. Don't you?

No, not you, o ye paragon of thoughtful, reasoned, flexible discourse. Pax, pax. I don't mean you.

I mean you, over there. The hater. The one whose blog posts are just a semiotic token on which to hang a word-picture of your angry red misanthropic face. Yeah, you know who you are.

Try to change, okay? You're scaring us.

Nice post jaspersky! Visit again, and often. The volume and intensity has been turned up as of late, due to "hot topics", and some newcomers determined to take some of their aggressions out on anything that gets posted. There are many more enjoyable, intelligent posters trying to keep the peace, new and old. Please don't be turned off by the current "shoot-outs". Hopefully, this too will pass.

Jaspersky

you can either have people shooting their mouths off, or people shooting their guns off, take your pick. Just imagine what the rant and ravers would be like without gun control. As for my own verbose "style", when talking to people who are ideologically ill, one does have to resort to speaking in a language that they can understand. Colin, of example, knows why I've gotten into the gutter with him. He took me there on this and past threads. And for as much as people don't like the crudity, lies and blatant falacies sold as truths are far worse. Its no excuse for crudity and mundane put downs, but thats how it is.

Its like this. We can whitewash it all we want, but underneath, its still the same old same old. Apologies if its not socially correct enough for you if it offends you (I sincerely mean this) but as for apolgies to the rest... sometimes the ugly soundbites are better than the truth full on. (start with the nasties first and comprise from there. Getting it out in the open quick works for me just fine)

When you run across a murderer or a thief or a rapist, serials at that, are you apt to call them human beings, or the latter...

When you run across someone who is ideologically brainwashed, or guided by pure selfishness, do you white wash it, or call a spade a spade? Lord knows everyone is capable of change. Will they? And what does it take? How much humility will it take?

The insensitive ones or the ones who know (not just think) they are in the right have insults like this bounce them like rain on wax. But the ones who are sensitive to it and are caught guessing, reexamine themselves and change their ways. Utimately, we want to get away from extremes, do we not?

And there it is. Some feel its fine to tote guns where they please. Others do not. Guns beget guns. Violence and the opportunity for violence beggets more violence. Do we really need more police, jails and guns, or the actual acceptance of this truth?

Some feel its fine to holster the welcoming wagon at the border. Others don't. Some feel we should have an identity separate from the U.S.. Others don't. The majority of 200 million in court costs came from U.S. challenges from the gun lobby and manufacturers, not the Canadians. Thats a fact for anyone who cares to look. And the list goes on. So while I'll blatantly admit I'm crude and foul mouthed, its not a perfect world before and long after I'm silenced and gone. So fair?

Yes Duncan and when exactly did I drag you into the gutter?

Why is it so hard to accept that Canadian have and are fighting the Anti-gun lobby (Who got their money from the previous government and supported by Government agencies paid and directed to spy on gun owners, see the latest testimony from the Guite trial) You feel the need to make the opposition to the present laws foreign, because it does fit in with your views.

Firearm owners don’t mind having a decent set of laws and rules governing the use, misuse and ownership of firearms. They just don’t like the pile of garbage masquerading as The Firearms Act. To be fair the one part of the Act that works well and is respected is the requirement for basic training and for the hunting course. The only part of the Act that functions well and achieves it’s goal with minimal cost to the public and firearm owners.

Duncan and Colin:
IMO, the shoot-out between the two of you, was an education for someone like me. I have been reading Colin for some time now, and never think of him as a loose cannon. I am also extremely pleased to meet Duncan, and am a big fan. Without debate, heated or not, I would not have honed an opinion for myself. I found jaspersky in the wee hours, and knowing what he read on other threads as well, took it apon myself to assure him it was not that vile a place to visit. If he had been visiting longer, he would not have needed assurances.

Ohmygod

I certainly don’t mind debate and understand that Duncan disagrees with me. I just find his constant use of personal insults useless and self-defeating.