Picture this, if the federal government were a city and this city was planned with the idea that the federal departments that deal more directly with government were placed close to the Parliament and those that deal with the government less were placed further away, well, in this city, the RCMP would probably be placed in the boonies. Given this fact, clearly, Stephen Harper didn't make this decision.
According to the Liberal Party, they accuse Stephen Harper of having direct authority over the RCMP. Lack of research? Or just plain stupidity? Regardless, it's pretty pitiful that our Official Opposition can't think of making a few checks before actually sending a press release.
As Stephen Taylor deduces on his August 18 blog entry, the Liberals, if given the mandate to govern, would begin meddling with our federal police judging by their belief. They claim that he was removed of his duties because he is in favour of the long-gun registry. Still to this day, they're so sold on the idea that this gun registry will stop crime that they were able to blow $2 billion on it.
If you are wondering what the initial estimates were for implementing the program were, well, they were $119 million to implement with a planned $117 million in revenues from registration fees. Subtract those numbers and you get a net cost of $2 million to implement. Cost overruns? 100,000% more than planned. You only get percentages like that in Zimbabwe!
What's great about the long-gun registry is the fact that according to Auditor General Sheila Fraser's report regarding the registry, she said:
"The performance report focuses on activities such as issuing licences and registering firearms. The Centre does not show how these activities help minimize risks to public safety with evidence-based outcomes such as reduced deaths, injuries and threats from firearms."
What's funny is that I won't be surprised if some Liberals decide to vote in favour of, or abstain from voting altogether on Bill C-391 because many constituents in Liberal ridings hate the long-gun registry.
It's all a question of who commits gun crime and whether they use long-guns to commit them. Last I checked, most gun crime involves handguns or smaller weapons such as knives, not a hunting rifle. It's a question of practicality. If someone is a thief, he most likely wouldn't walk into a bank with a rifle to rob it, he's most likely going to use a handgun. And, if he has half of a brain, he will buy it illegally removing the need to register it, thereby, bypassing the gun registry's supposed aim to catch gun-toting criminals.
Concluding, the long-gun registry idea was conceived with good intentions but it just isn't practical and is definitely not a frugal undertaking as we have witnessed. It's clearly time that it should go.
0 comments:
Post a Comment