Guilty as charged. My only excuse is lack of patience.

After I've laid out the case against Alan Rock's gun registry the fourth time in the same thread using smaller and smaller words, the temptation to mock is too strong for me. Not a problem I have here, but other places, well, I've been naughty. Quite successfully too.

I'll crawl back under my bridge now. :)

The article is an excersize in stating the obvious. Nutters have always thrived on the internet and always will. Nutters are hardly limited to one end of the political spectrum. The right has its fair share of flamers and conspiracy theory loons as well.

Jose

I have given this issue much thought, and i would like to say this about that:
##&%@(*&^$)^^^^$#@*#@#@$^&&%@!!!!

Good Post Phantom

I agree with you completely, when it comes to Allan Rock and his gun registry. He was, is and always will be, a mental midget. Him and the Liberal Gang did it for political gain to satisfy, some sqeeking wheel's in good old Toronto (can you say Wendy C).

I've bitten my tongue so hard a few times, talking to Liberals, it's lucky I can still talk. And from time to time, when it's appropriate, I've been know to let fly with a stream of verbal diarrhea, that would make a street walker blush.

Fear not..you not alone

Reminds me of the Liberal campaign ads.

In Canada.

I'm not making this up.

The Phantom sez: "After I've laid out the case against Alan Rock's gun registry the fourth time in the same thread using smaller and smaller words, the temptation to mock is too strong for me. Not a problem I have here, but other places, well, I've been naughty. Quite successfully too."

Good lad! Stout effort! Jolly good show!

However at the risk of detracting from phantom's delicious caustic sarcasm, it really does not take a rocket scientist to lay out the case against the gun registry as the legislation has demonstrably been shown to be so lame....OTOH it most certainly takes a genetic throwback to fail to grasp your case....mind where you're trolling Phantom, I think you keep casting your bait into the shallow end of the gene pool IYKWIM ;-)

Rock is vertically challenged, too. I can't wait until he's recalled from the UN, and others like him are forced to return to their day jobs in law firms across the country. Excellent piece by Paul Wells in Maclean's this week. Makes me long for the days of the REAL Iron Lady.

I wouldn't have an issue with the gun registry IF:
1) it wasn't such a boon doggle for the bureaucrats (we can licence cars for a fraction of the cost)
2) if I could feel comfortable that the crooks and the liberals wouldn't use the info to someday swipe legitimate guns
3) if it called for unannounced spot checks to ensure that that the weapons were being stored according to the regulations.
4) if it ensured that owners undertook mandatory education on firearm safety, and
5) ammunition was treated the same way (i.e. not leaving names/addresses of the purchasers around for anyone to copy
6) they also stored the ballastics of every weapon for potential forensic use later on.

I don't go as far as the (wacko) NRA in that I don't believe it is the god given right of every wackjob to own a fire arm. I grew up around rifles and shotguns and have had my share over the years (.22 to .306 rifles, 10-12-410 Gauge shotguns) but don't have one anymore because frankly I don't have the time/inclination to go hunting and couldn't be bothered getting a permit anyway. That being said, I've nothing against hunters and wish they'd take care of the deer and bear around here... we're getting far too many in this fairly dense rural environment.

The way it is right now, it's dead easy for crooks (and liberals! :-) to find out who owns guns, what type they are, where they are. But the single biggest reason I can't stand it, is that I'm convinced that some day soon, the Liberals will come up with some wacko reason to ban all guns and will unilaterally swipe them from legitimate gun owners who have been following the rules as they should.

In the meantime, make penalties for anyone using a gun so stiff that they won't have a chance to ever do it again. As far as handguns go... I've no use for them. They could come up with a better solution than having gun owners driving around with them in their trunks to and from gun club meets.

Right on Maps. See, the problem is though that you can rhyme all that off at these liberal types and all you get back is invective. No reasonable discourse, just "*%(%&*#)(%(%!!!!!"

So I've taken to unkind words on occasion. Rude of me, but there it is.

You should take up pistols though, they are a great deal of fun. Nothing like the recoil on a .45 to get one's attention.

WL McKenzie, while I have been known to poke a stick through the bars at some of the lower blogs, I find it doesn't much matter where you go these days. If they lean left, you're going to have to take a shower afterward.

Bullet, thanks for the vote of confidence. I apreciate it.

You seem like someone who's at least willing to LEARN, Maps, so I'll give you that, but the single biggest problem with trying to discuss the "gun" issue in Canada is the fact that very few people other than gun owners (yes, including the very people you'd EXPECT to know about them, such as politicians and police officers) actually know what the current laws ARE. Out of your "I wish" list above, at least two of your wants are ALREADY part of the existing law (spot checks for storage, and mandatory training for owners). I personally don't have much of a problem with either of these, but I don't believe that guns or gun owners should be singled out for special treatment in that regard; if they can search my home on a whim to ensure that my firearms are stored the way they have to be, why shouldn't they also be able to search YOUR home on a whim to make sure that you're storing your prescription drugs or diesel oil and fertilizer properly, or to ensure that you're not in possession of a meth lab, still, child porn, etc., etc.? As much as they'll deny it, the registry and the ammo sales books ARE doubtless being used as a "shopping list" for the criminal element, but the gun control lobby will simply turn that around again to say "Well, we obviously need tougher laws, then; if we take those guns away from their LEGAL owners, there won't be any available for (extra-governmental) criminal theft, right?" Your "ballistics" idea might sound good on the surface or for those who think "CSI" is a documentary, but in those jurisdictions where it has been tried (New York and Maryland, for two), it has been an utter, absolute failure. In the 5 years that their "ballistic fingerprinting" programs have been running, NY hasn't had a single crime solved, and Maryland only recently had what they trumpeted as their first "successful hit" (the fact that the crime in question was committed in a bar in front of numerous eye-witnesses that positively identified the shooter was conveniently lost in the shuffle). As a general rule, if you want to know how much a given country or jurisdiction trusts its citizens, all you need to do is look at their "gun control" laws.

Maps and Phantom,

Gun control only seems to make much difference in countries that are a) islands and b) have strong and broad grassroot support to disarm. Basicaly Japan and England. Gun registration in Canada actually makes the problem worse.

Fifteen years ago most gun dealers/sellers in Ontario would want to see an FAC before selling you a gun. But that was before Mark Lepine. Nowadays its easier than ever to buy a gun illegaly. There's plenty of private gun owners looking to get rid of unregistered stock hassle free. We've replaced the FAC with expensive and cumbersome swiss cheese.

I would have thought that the radfem reaction to Mark Lepine would have died down by now. I haven't lived in Canada for four years so I don't understand where the current tide of gun control is coming from.

Jose:
Let me slip on my tinfoil hat and let you know where the roots of "gun control" is coming from.

The UN.

Don't take my crazy "VLWC" word for it, spend a few minutes digging into it yourself.

The majority of the member countries of the UN are dictatorships of one form or another.

It's just another manifestation of the old battle between idividualism and statism. *sigh*

SDS. I totally agree. Good observations. My only comment is that Harper better keep *all* of his promises. And I think he will. I look for the stupid long gun firearms legislation to be cancelled very soon, as well as all of his other main promises.

Mad Mike. Don't hold your breath. For some people a few minutes research is just too much to ask. Totally agree with you about the UN. That's a whole other post though.

Harper needs to first keep his promises to those who voted for him, and in the first twelve months too. That does not necessarily include Quebec, although I think he can hold onto those few seats because they obviously don't want to vote either Bloc or NDP. And I predict they will never vote Liberal again.

It would also help his case if he made a deal with Bush to enter into a proper role in defending North America, in return for ending this silly softwood lumber issue. I really hope he gets those two things done soon.

Just noticed that "the head of Canada's police chiefs says he will impress upon the new government the merits of the national gun registry." I say good luck. They will get more funding if the firearms legislation is cancelled.

I say give the police more officers and tougher laws, the courts some marching orders, the criminals tougher sentences and leave the rest of us alone. If not then all the real men will soon be in Alberta and the pretenders that just voted, once again, for a criminal Liberal Party will all be congregated in those few big cities sipping their expensive European coffees.

"Harper better keep *all* of his promises..."

Or else what? Vote Liberal which didn't keep ONE promise?

I know, vote Green as Uncle Jack Layton is scary...

Harper has his hands full alright, not only from the airhead left wing dings, but extreem right of centre armchair politicians.

Give the guy some room to breathe eh!

He'll do well. Till the Liberals get a new leader and Ontario migrates like Lemmings back to them.

cheers
tom

Jose,

In England (Great Britain, however one styles it) the Gun Control laws haven't really been a success. Instead, they've spawned a new round of calls for control - of knives. Because now that guns are *supposedly* out of the hands of criminals, the folks in the hospital ER's are complaining about the number of stabbing cases they see, and how if knives were to be outlawed, many lives could be saved.

I guess now it's "guns don't kill people - knives kill people", or something to that effect.

Knife registration, anyone????

tomax. I agree. I'm giving Harper a year. And the "what else" applies to Albertans. If Alberta gives up on Harper they only have one more choice. It ain't a federal party and it ain't Canada. That's what scares me. Alberta isn't Quebec. They can afford to go. I love Canada so much and it saddens me to see what Canada's turned into the last dozen or so years. Since Trudeau actually. Where's the "Just Society" anyway? I've never applied for nor accepted welfare, UI or a grant of any kind in all my 67 years. The Just Society is for career welfare bums. I personally know of two third generation welfare families. One votes Liberal and the other NDP.

My hopes are on Harper and I'm rooting for him. But if he fails then I will help reduce Canada to the size of one province in order to save it. Sad to say.

When it comes to the "Gun Control" issue, I've noticed everyone is unanimous in vilification of Allan Rock. Not my favorite person, either. But credit for the GC fiasco should be given, where it is due, to Kim Campbell. She pounced on the Gamil Gharbi/ Montreal Massacre like an agenda starved politician. Rock continued the folly when he took over. The Mulroney Conservatives and Chretien/Martin liberals have all used us as their scapegoat when convenient. It's way more politically correct than incarcerating gun wielding ethnic victims of a cold uncaring society.

John, as a realist, I can't see Alberta seperating.

Who would lead us? Uncle Ralph? Egad, he's a closet Liberal. $400 million bailout to big businesses during the Mad Cow crisis shows where his heart was.

So for all the "Alberta wants out" moonbats, then what?

But that's for another post, don't want to be accused of feeding trolls.

I will admit that if the Liberals had won this last election I'd seriously be thinking of alternatives.

We have some good leaders here in Alberta, Paul Hinman, Marilyn Burns, and so on. Just the herd mentality exists here also - vote PC no matter what.

Like my letter published in the Calgary Sun, our next step is to do a house cleaning in here Alberta, now.

cheers
tom

Over on Angry in the Great White North he is posting on an attack on AGWN and on SDA.

The attack is from a posting on Rabble Babble, one of the most aptly named sites online.

Too funny, those who can't debate based on principle and merit are boring.

TIZ

tomax. I hope you don't think I'm a troll.

As a realist, I can't see Quebec separating either. But that hasn't kept them from getting their way with Ottawa on too many occasions.

It's time for Albertans to clean house and elect a new leader. I knew Ralph in another life. I agree that he's a closet liberal. I say Alberta desperately needs a Duceppe. Someone who will tell Ottawa to go to hell when they refuse to listen to the West. Someone who will threaten to hold off on the transfer payments until they get what they want, and tell Ottawa to "sue us". Let the whole issue of provincial/federal rights play out in court. I know that's silly but the way Ottawa does things lately is also silly.

We need a fighter. Give Albertans a fighter and everyone would line up behind him. Or her.

John, by all means sorry don't think that. Just a figure of statement for those who are looking for overnight miracle changes from Harper.

Likewise, the statement of just giving Harper a year isn't much. Consider he is swimming upstream against all the Liberal appointed officers in Government positions, as well as Supreme Courts, he'll do well just keeping his head above the waters.

I'd rather give him a full 2 years before we start expecting results and maybe 4 years before society rights itself upright on this left listing ship.

"Small" things like government accountability and such, well yes, right away.

cheers
tom

cheers
tom

tomax. If my memory serves me correctly, the first year is when a new government is able to push it's agenda easier than the second and third yers. The fourth year is a write-off, more or less. And I think the Liberal Party is going to attempt to get their act together fast. Right now it would be difficult for them to do much without an elected leader. So it's a leadership convention first, then a byelection, before there's an organized opposition. And I think that the next year or so, after Harper sets up several commissions of inquiry into Liberal corruption, and when the results start making the front page, will be the time for Harper to get lots done. I kinda think Harper is a fighter. He certainly is a thinker. My bets are on him and he has my full support. It's just that I've been through this before. And I'm kinda edgy I guess. Like a lot of other people in the West, I have real expectations this time. It would be one too many times if we're disappointed again.

I might add. Wouldn't it be something if an elected leader in Canada actually delivers on all of his main promises? That would be a tough act to follow. That would be the yardstick that all future leaders would be measured against.

I hope I hear Harper say something like; "Unlike the Liberal Party, I keep my promises. If you can't support me then force another election and lets make that the central issue in it."

John: Good point about getting it done in the first year, never looked at it like that. Yeah, get the stuff passed while the Liberals are floundering, but only thing that worries me is the NDP and BLOCheads running interference.

Theoretically there are more left votes in Parliament than right at the moment, so this will be interesting.

But you are right Harper is a thinker. Hopefully the 'right' (dual meaning) will give him room to grow rather than start whining on here and give the opposition ammo.

cheers
tom

Hey, Maps, ain't nothin' wrong with the NRA! Of course, I'm a conservative American, so . . . Actually, though, I figured the jig was probably up for Landslide Annie in the next election when I realized that, walking down my block in the middle of her riding, I kept passing not one but two trucks (on different sides/ends of the block - not the same owner) with gunracks and NRA "lifetime member" stickers on them! (And one with Sask. plates!) Of course, there were also some cars with clever (not) little anti-Bush stickers (why? he's not even your PM or anything), but you don't even find two NRA lifetime members on the same block everyday back home in Texas . . . guess who actually goes to vote?

John C. Thank you. Mr. Harper has not even taken office and people are already planning the end. Give me a break. I am with you, my hope is with him because I love my country and my bet is with Mr. Harper. I can hardly wait to see him in action. Here's to better days ahead. I can hardly wait for the investigations to begin.

Harper will do the best he can with what he's been dealt. If he keeps it simple, and sticks to his plan (his 5 items) for the moment, the people will see he means wot he says. No party will dare force a vote before 1 1/2 yrs after wot we've been thru these last yrs. Opposition parties that make passing sensible legislation difficult might be doing themselves damage if the public is aware of it. Remember, the libs barely got their seats outside city cores. It was very nearly a tie. I suspect some lib backbenchers may vote to pass cons. legislation. Harpers dressingdown of Wilkins the other day set the tone, eh? Just politics, but certainly let it be known he's NOT Bush's lil toady. Onya Stephen! *^^*
Gun Control: Steady aim and a tight grip! :oP

I've followed those rules adamently from day One...

http://ashesoftyranny.blogspot.com/2006/01/iron.html

Over on Angry in the Great White North he is posting on an attack on AGWN and on SDA. The attack is from a posting on Rabble Babble, one of the most aptly named sites online. Too funny, those who can't debate based on principle and merit are boring. TIZ Posted by TIZReporter

Indeed:

Woe, O! Woe! They are on to us...

Click the "534" for that, and much, much more...

The Phantom said: "WL McKenzie, while I have been known to poke a stick through the bars at some of the lower blogs, I find it doesn't much matter where you go these days. If they lean left, you're going to have to take a shower afterward."

True enough...I always find inflexible partisans of any stripe to be reactionary but most right of center will attack your points and rationale, the left seems to always attack you or your personal integrity and avoid supporting their position with fact or reasoning.

This leads me to conclude that those leftist partisans/activists are largely acceptant of conditioned conformity to utopian orthodoxies...( ideals championed not by personal cathartic reasoning and logical conclusions based in fact but by robotic acceptance of ideas and theories which they never question or put to objective testing) mob menatlity accepted at face value. dogmatic leftist utopianism is an orthodoxy accepted on faith not unlike other dogmatic belief systems. When challenged to a test of reason which would reveal flaws in the dogma of these faithful, they become aggressive as a denial defense of their faith...in many cases fanatically/maniacally lashing out at the offending "infidel" who has blasphemed their sacred dogma with reasoned argument. Neo-leftist dogma is very much a matter of "puritan" utopian politics.

I agree with your assessments of the nastiness as well,... the times I stuck my head into places like babble and the like, and offered a civil counter argument to some popular misconception, it was like being assailed by thousands of psychotic spider monkeys hissing and screeching at me from their cage and hurling their own feces at "the threat to the colony" in attemps to get me to leave.....like the sort of puerile tribalism one would find in a scene from lord of the flies.

All this seems representative of observations Von Mises made about left wing ideologies resisting and seeking to eascape the same Hegelian dialectic that spawened them and thus must be accepted on faith alone or through propagandist methodology.