Prorogation won't halt bill to scrap gun registry

CTV News ^ | Jan 4, 2010 | CTV News

[caveat emptor]

OTTAWA — Gun control advocates briefly hoped Prime Minister Stephen Harper's decision to prorogue Parliament would kill a controversial private member's bill to scrap the long gun registry.

But their hopes have been shot down, thanks to procedural reforms introduced 15 years ago.

The bill -- which was under examination by a parliamentary committee after winning first and second reading votes in the House of Commons -- will simply return at that stage once the new session of Parliament opens March 3.

[caveat emptor]

This is good news, though not as big a step as this report suggests.
1. It's just about long guns, not guns; clarified in article.
2. The registry isn't being "scrapped". Guns currently registered will stay registered. What happens to registration of guns guns currently registered but sold is not made clear in the article.
3.It would appear that new purchases will not be entered into the registry.
4. I would appear that there will be no change in the requirement of a license to purchase a firearm.
5. It isn't clear how this will play out in the long run, but seems the registry will atrophy and eventually disappear.

This will create some additional red tape for an individual in the acquisition of additional long guns. No big deal - just make sure there is a verifiable paper trail.

[world weary]

Having the requirement of a firearms license to purchase guns and ammo isn’t a completely unreasonable requirement for the government. Additionally requiring that anyone wanting such a license pass a basic firearms safety handling test also isn’t completely outrageous. Glad to see the gun registry going away though, people who buy guns legally usually aren’t the ones commiting crimes.

[CurlyDave]

Having the requirement of a firearms license to purchase guns and ammo isn’t a completely unreasonable requirement for the government. Additionally requiring that anyone wanting such a license pass a basic firearms safety handling test also isn’t completely outrageous.

I hope you are from Canada.

IMHO both requirements are outrageous.

[Natural Born 54]

PING

[world weary]

I am, but why would that make a difference.

[goldstategop]

Prorogation is simply the end of a session of Parliament. It now stands adjourned until March. The only bills on the Order Paper now die is when Parliament is dissolved. When a new session begins, the bills simply continue from the last time they were heard. The 40th Parliament will convene for its 3rd session in March.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find only things evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelogus

[fanfan]

Thanks for the ping, Natural Born 54.

[Clive]

-

[longun45]

“the requirement of a firearms license to purchase guns and ammo isn’t a completely unreasonable requirement for the government. Additionally requiring that anyone wanting such a license pass a basic firearms safety handling test also isn’t completely outrageous.”

This statement is outrageous. If you want firearms education then put in the schools where it belongs. Say about the 4th grade. But making some one acquire a license for ownership of a piece of hardware is ridiculous. How about a match license? How about a water license? How about a paper license, those paper cuts are murder.

[-YYZ-]

“I hope you are from Canada.

IMHO both requirements are outrageous.”

From your perspective as an American with your historic Second Ammendment rights, I can see why you would feel that way. As a Canadian I agree with the poster that this doesn’t seem like an unreasonable requirement (for Canadians). In any case, at least this (more or less) scrapping of the gun registry is a step in the right direction. Unfortunately Canada’s population distribution is dominated with big cities, and in general big city people seem to have trouble comprehending certain basic facts, such as that criminals are for the most part not using legal long guns; the handguns that criminals use are almost certainly all illegaly owned, and that not everyone lives in a big city like they do and in some places rifles and shotguns are actually necessary tools.

[caveat emptor]

Having the requirement of a firearms license to purchase guns and ammo isn’t a completely unreasonable requirement for the government

Under current law lumping guns and ammo together makes [some] sense. As I understand it, a person can legally buy ammo for guns which he legally owns - not which he can legally own but which he does legally own. That could change, depending on the details of any new law.

[caveat emptor]

Prorogation is simply the end of a session of Parliament. It now stands adjourned until March. The only bills on the Order Paper now die is when Parliament is dissolved. When a new session begins, the bills simply continue from the last time they were heard. The 40th Parliament will convene for its 3rd session in March.

I'm not sure what you intended to say here (The only bills on the Order Paper now die is when Parliament is dissolved.), but it seems to neglect the distinction which is frustrating people who are called "gun control advocates" in the article. This is likely the reason why the proposed legislation was introduced as a private member's bill. The relevent information from the article is given below.

Until the mid-1990s, proroguing or suspending Parliament wiped the legislative slate. All bills, no matter how many months they'd been debated or how close they'd been to passing, died on the order paper.

If the government wanted to bring back a bill in the new session of Parliament, it had to start all over again from square one. But that's no longer the case.

Private members' bills, such as Manitoba Tory MP Candice Hoeppner's gun registry bill, are all automatically reinstated at the same point in the legislative process where they left off.

Government-sponsored bills require the majority consent of the Commons to be reinstated but that's typically been accomplished with little trouble.

[GreenLanternCorps]

While registration requirements are outrageous to an American, they are a step in the right direction.

A few years ago, under the Liberals, Canada was on a slow track to severely restrict firearms. That tide has turned. While they have a long way to go, they are moving in the right direction, and that is a good thing.