Friday, January 13, 2006

Stoddard Online

Stoddard Online Election campaigns do not bring out the best, they tend to bring out the worst of a handful of wannabe's who would lead us to believe they have all the answers. The agenda is usually derived from seizing upon something controversial, and building a campaign around it.

Prime Minster Paul Martin does a wonderful job of putting his mouth into motion before putting his brain into gear. This is evidenced by his recent country wide tirade on crime, and curbing it by banning the ownership of handguns in Canada. If only it was that easy.

Under the Liberal government, we have seen registration of long guns come into effect. It has done absolutely nothing to curb crime. There were certain firearms that the government allowed prior that were controversial, such as long magazine semi-automatics designed as military weapons. The public generally found no fault with the decision to remove them from the public. Statistics prove that the registering of rifles and shotguns has had no positive impact on crime reduction.

In the case of handguns, Canada already has some of the toughest legislation in the world controlling ownership of these guns. Each handgun has to be legally registered. Generally, those purchasing handguns were those who engage in recreational shooting, and those who collect legally. Crime statistics prove that gun crimes committed with legally registered guns is minimal.

Is Paul Martin so naive to think that gun crimes will simply go away by registering long guns and an outright ban on all handguns? Surely, he is smarter than that. The crook will still get his guns. Crooks will still smuggle their guns or buy them on the black market. After all is said and done, who will suffer the most from all this? The law-abiding firearms owner of course, not to mention all the millions of dollars paid out in taxes by the taxpayers of this country for another inept government bureaucracy.

We already have the tools in place in Canada to make a huge impact on crime. It is our criminal code, and it's provisions for the sentencing of violators. What we need is for the government to get after the judges to get off their butts and make the teeth bite. If someone is convicted of any crime involving a firearm, throw the individual in jail for a long time. We already have the law in place that states if a gun is used in a crime, additional time can be added on to a sentence. It is rarely done though because our judges act like a bunch of ballerinas, who appear to be more interested in the criminals well being, than the rights of the victim.

It is time Mr. Martin to use some common sense. In my view, if you are planning to ban guns at this stage, then you might want to consider banning automobiles, knives, and even rocks. In the case of murder, the victim is just as dead from those weapons as they would be from a gun. Someone who came before this writer once said, "When Guns Are Outlawed, Only The Outlaws Will have Guns."


Anonymous said...

You are a very opinionated person, and your statements are bold. It would appear when you have something to say, you say it. I respect that. Since discovering your site, I have begun to pay more attention to the election campaign and the grass roots problems.
I support your views entirely on the subject of firearms. I am not a shooter, but would definitely feel insulted if I was. A few bad apples should not be cause for the whole basket to rot. I further agree that the judiciary in this country needs to clean up it's act.

Concerned from Winnipeg

David M said...

Remember you from the old days of media, still the Redneck I see.
Too bad you cant ever praise the government instead of knocking it all the time. Surely people dont read your junk. You would bitch no matter which party is in power. People like you stir up a lot of crap and that is what is wrong with the country.

David M from Kamloops, BC