Sudbury letters: Liberals are desperate; cannabis laws should apply equally | Sudbury Star

Liberal gun proposals a sign of desperation

Desperate men use desperate means. A befuddled, embarrassed and desperate Justin Trudeau and his spin-doctors needed a quick channel-changer after Trudeau’s most recent embarrassment.

They chose their favourite political shell game, a gun ban of such proportions that it would be the largest arbitrary gun ban and confiscation in Canadian history, aimed not at criminals, street gangs and gangsters, but at law-abiding hunters, farmers and sport shooters.

Of course, it would do absolutely nothing to deter street violence, mass shootings and the criminal use of guns, but that’s not important, since it’s all about politics, not logic.

About 2.2 million law-abiding Canadian men and women are legally licensed to own firearms, after having taken courses and passed examinations and practical tests. They are not the problem and they should not be targeted.

Trudeau’s plan of attack on lawful gun-owners entails seizing about 250,000 non-restricted rifles from innocent citizens and allowing cities to close legitimate firearms stores and forcing all handgun owners to surrender their firearms to government storage centres. None of these measures, of course, targets criminals, violent individuals or street gangs. But they are usually good for votes from those who don’t know the whole story.

What Trudeau and the Liberals are not telling you, but as reported by the Canadian Press, is that the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP) oppose Trudeau’s new gun ban. CACP President, Vancouver Police Chief Adam Palmer, says that Canada’s laws are already strong and no other gun law is needed.

Of major importance, but not reported by Trudeau’s minions, is the growing list of high-profile police officials who strongly oppose Trudeau’s gun ban, including, besides Chief Adam Palmer, RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki, Toronto Chief Mark Saunders, Winnipeg Chief Danny Smyth, Regina Chief Evan Bray, Retired OPP Commissioner Chris Lewis, Toronto Police Association President Mark McCormack, Halifax Regional Police and other police officials.

That list is growing daily.

So why all this hullaballoo if it does absolutely nothing to curb street gangs and criminals who don’t buy guns at legitimate stores and who will definitely not store their handguns in government storage centres? Trudeau needs to change the conversation. Don’t fall for it.

Simon Guillet

Arguments not logical or fair

In 2014-15, our provincial and federal treasuries lost $1.3 billion because of the Indigenous, reserve-based, illegal cigarette trade.

Now, with reserves like Wahnapitae demanding that their marijuana businesses be tax- and licence-free, those treasury losses are going to be greatly increased, thus severely impairing the ability of our governments to provide all the programs and services that we all, including our Indigenous citizens, expect and demand.

So it’s not right for Indigenous bands, while on the one hand making ever-increasing demands for more monies and services from our cash-strapped governments, at the same time adopting tax haven policies and practices that weaken and deplete the treasuries of those very same governments.

To the increasing extent that this occurs, non-Indigenous taxpayers have to shoulder an increased tax burden to make up the tax difference lost by these activities. This is not right or fair.

Secondly, the monies and services that Canadian taxpayers presently provide to First Nations — a special category of Canadian citizens — are provided to them on the basis that they have rights to them. Hannah Arendt wrote that “only within the bounds of citizenship in a particular state do people have ‘the right to claim rights.’”

If the Wahnapitae reserve claims not to need a marijuana license because they are a separate “nation”, and thus, being citizens of that other “nation”, are not bound by the laws of Canada, they are in effect saying that, to the extent that they are citizens of this other “nation”, they are something less than full citizens of Canada. Therefore, their asserted “rights” to all those monies and services provided, which presumes they are full citizens of Canada and thus fully subject to Canadian law, should be lessened at least by the same amount that their “economically self-sustaining”, “separate nation” activities further impoverish our provincial and federal treasuries.

Peter Best

This content was originally published here.

Content

Login

Welcome! Login in to your account

Remember meLost your password?

Lost Password