A Law and Order Government That Loves Guns

Anyone still harbouring doubts about whose interests the Harper regime is governing on behalf of would be well-advised to read this story in today's Star. Entitled RCMP concerned as Conservatives consider loosening firearms restrictions, it reveals the latest legislative considerations of a government that claims to be tough on crime, but sees little reason to reduce the opportunity to commit crime.

Co-chaired by Steve Torino of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association, the Canadian Firearms Advisory Committee met with Public Safety Minister Vic Toews and other senior government officials in Ottawa in late March, after the bill to kill the long-gun registry had cleared the Commons and was on the verge of Senate approval.

The committee, comprised almost exclusively of lads who love their guns, has made a series of recommendation to the Harper regime. Amongst the gems are the following:

- getting rid of the “prohibited” category of firearms

- reclassifying weapons such as certain handguns and assault weapons (for example, the AK-47, shown in the picture at the top of this post) as “restricted” only

- removing the requirement on gun owners to get an “authorization to transport” firearms

- making seized firearms — which by law must now be destroyed — legally available for public sale or trade

- making [f]irearms licences ... valid for at least 10 years “or longer,”, a move strongly opposed by the RCMP, since it would impede their “ability to monitor, on a timely basis, any changes to an individual’s mental health status”

The entire breadth of the committee's recommendations can be read here, but surely even the brief overview I have included in this post should be sufficient to lead right-thinking people to realize that whoever the Harper regime is governing on behalf of, it surely isn't the majority of Canadians.

A Clarification From Young Tim

Tim Hudak, the boy who would be premier, has issued a policy clarification:

Hudak said the thrust of his proposal to put alcoholic beverages in corner stores, supermarkets or private specialty stores is to make it easier for Ontario consumers to buy a six-pack of beer or a bottle of wine.

Should the master recycler of tired ideas ever attain his ambition of leading the province, I suspect that the ready availability of alcohol, and the temporary solace it provides, will be much appreciated by Ontarians.

Harper's Debasement Of Canadian Foreign Policy

That Canada once enjoyed a sterling reputation in the international arena is something beyond dispute. That its standing has fallen precipitately under the misguided direction of the Harper regime is a truth that I suspect only the most rabidly ideological would disagree with.

Perhaps the most egregious departure from norms that most would consider reasonable is found in its Mid-East policy, which can be summed up in four words: unqualified support for Israel. Despite its disproportionate response to aggression from Hamas, Israel, it seems, can do no wrong in the eyes of our political 'leaders.'

In his Star column today, Tim Harper writes that Canada is doing no favour to the Jewish state by aiding and abetting its reprehensible behaviour. Well worth the read.

Just A Fleeting Thought About Young Tim

I have a busy morning ahead, so just a brief post for now. That serial recycler of tired policy, young Tim Hudak, continues to maintain his naive faith in the virtues of the private sector as a panacea for all that ails us, yesterday calling for the end of the LCBO's monopoly on alcohol sales.

Trumpeting the virtues of privatization, along with the possible sale in whole or in part of the monopoly that injects about $1.6 billion per annum into provincial coffers, the never-ready-for-prime-time-politics leader of the Progressive Conservatives might be advised to supplement his populist rhetoric with a little research. As published in today's Star, Canadian jurisdictions that have privatized sales have seen an increase in prices and a reduction in selection.

Perhaps none of that, however, will matter to those who support the errant but evangelical vision of young Tim.

Just Wondering

What does it say about young Tim Hudak that this constitutes a major policy announcement?

Just wondering

On Polarized Politics

Well aware that the universe does not revolve around the City of Toronto, which is within an hour's drive of my abode, I rarely write posts that pertain to it. I make an infrequent exception today because of a greater truth that the risible antics of its mayor gives rise to.

It is hardly a revelation to say that we live in poisonously polarized times; for this troubling fact I lay the bulk of blame at the clay feet of the extreme right-wing. I have opined many times here that the Harper government is the most divisive in our history, reliant as it is on tactics ranging from demagoguery to name-calling to open contempt for our democratic traditions. And the results of that elevation of party politics over the well-being of the country is evident in many ways, including the recently reported loss of faith in democracy.

Nonetheless, I was reminded of how much I too have fallen victim of this polarization when The Mound of Sound responded to one of my posts about Mr. Harper:

I never much liked the Progressive Conservative party although there were some MPs I truly did respect and I held no enmity to most PC supporters. The Harper Conservatives are a different story entirely. I despise the party, its Fuhrer and its MPs and Senators. I don't feel much better about those who vote for it either. Harper has divided and shamed the nation and those who support him are responsible.

The Mound's comment made me remember earlier times in our political history when I felt little ill-will towards those who embraced a political philosophy different from my own, times when disagreements could be reasonably discussed and resolutions often found. One example would be the long reign of the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party, in part attributable to the steady hand of Bill Davis, the premier from 1971-85, one of a long line of Conservative premiers who governed with both moderation and consensus.

So how does this pertain to the ongoing sad spectacle of Rob ford and his thuggish brother Doug? In his column today entitled It’s time for conservatives to rescue the brand, Royson James, The Star's municipal affairs columnist, offers the following observation:

Reasonable, fiscal and progressive conservatives should be very concerned that the current city hall administration has damaged the right-wing brand...

They are red Tories and blue Liberals and practical New Democrats and they’ve managed to build a city with heart — an urban region that does such a good job balancing the interests of its people that this has become a brand admired and recognized around the world.

James has much more to say, essentially arguing that there are good and able people of moderation much more fit to help govern the city than the current administration, and that it is in the interests of those people to see the end of Rob Ford's reign, even if they identify themselves with the right. I hope you will take the time to read his entire piece.

For me, James' column is both a poignant reminder of the way things used to be on all levels of government, and an indication of what is still possible if both politicians and voters act out of concern for the collective good rather than the selfish advancement of their personal agendas. Without doubt, we have had enough of the latter.

Harper Strategy Succeeding

Here's the proof.