"TDM"?
This, from the awesomely titled Edmonton Journal piece "Klein to Harper: 'stay out of our face'", printed this morning:
(Klein) also said he would like Harper to deal with some of the issues "that are irksome to Albertans, like the gun registration and TDM - that's 'traditional definition of marriage.'"
It sounds like a specialty cable channel.
You know what, the gun registry doesn't bother me as a taxpayer. I realize it cost $2 billion to implement, but that money is sunk. We're not getting it back. Maybe we'd get a nickel back on the dollar for the computers.
Operating costs would be saved if it were scrapped, but in 2004-05 it cost $92 million to run, down from the $200 million high in 00-01, and logic would seem to point to further decreases: now that most of Canada's guns are in fact registered, a one-time only requirement, most of the costs incurred by the program will be through licensing only - required every five years.
When you renew your license, you're subject to an extensive background check. You're also required to complete a gun safety course. The Conservatives say they'll keep these requirements intact through their proposed certification process. Which, by the way, thank God if it's true. But that's going to cost money, and it'll be money that wasn't being spent before C-68 was passed. So that's going to eat into the savings.
Also required for license renewal for long guns: a spouse's, or ex-spouse's, signature. That means you have to convince at least one other person in your family that having a gun on your farm is a good idea. This little step goes a long way in curbing domestic violence, as well as reducing the incidence of rural suicides. No such provision would exist in the Conservatives' proposed certification plan. And exactly how much money are you saving here? I wouldn't think it to be much.
C-68 turned farmers and duck hunters into criminals, the complaint runs. But it didn't, really. All they had to do was register their firearms, and - badabing, badaboom! - they were law-abiding killers of living things once again.
The money we save by scrapping the registry will work out to a pittance, especially after the Conservatives introduce their certification program to replace it. There are other costs associated with the registry, mostly to do with its enforcement and the extra costs of jailing its transgressors; these work out to another fifteen or twenty million a year. So we're looking at a total of around a hundred ten, a hundred fifteen.
Big deal. If Alberta charged the oil companies here the amount of royalties to which we're entitled, we could pay for the registry ourselves about fifty times over.
Which if you want to talk irksome, there's a good place to start.
(Klein) also said he would like Harper to deal with some of the issues "that are irksome to Albertans, like the gun registration and TDM - that's 'traditional definition of marriage.'"
It sounds like a specialty cable channel.
You know what, the gun registry doesn't bother me as a taxpayer. I realize it cost $2 billion to implement, but that money is sunk. We're not getting it back. Maybe we'd get a nickel back on the dollar for the computers.
Operating costs would be saved if it were scrapped, but in 2004-05 it cost $92 million to run, down from the $200 million high in 00-01, and logic would seem to point to further decreases: now that most of Canada's guns are in fact registered, a one-time only requirement, most of the costs incurred by the program will be through licensing only - required every five years.
When you renew your license, you're subject to an extensive background check. You're also required to complete a gun safety course. The Conservatives say they'll keep these requirements intact through their proposed certification process. Which, by the way, thank God if it's true. But that's going to cost money, and it'll be money that wasn't being spent before C-68 was passed. So that's going to eat into the savings.
Also required for license renewal for long guns: a spouse's, or ex-spouse's, signature. That means you have to convince at least one other person in your family that having a gun on your farm is a good idea. This little step goes a long way in curbing domestic violence, as well as reducing the incidence of rural suicides. No such provision would exist in the Conservatives' proposed certification plan. And exactly how much money are you saving here? I wouldn't think it to be much.
C-68 turned farmers and duck hunters into criminals, the complaint runs. But it didn't, really. All they had to do was register their firearms, and - badabing, badaboom! - they were law-abiding killers of living things once again.
The money we save by scrapping the registry will work out to a pittance, especially after the Conservatives introduce their certification program to replace it. There are other costs associated with the registry, mostly to do with its enforcement and the extra costs of jailing its transgressors; these work out to another fifteen or twenty million a year. So we're looking at a total of around a hundred ten, a hundred fifteen.
Big deal. If Alberta charged the oil companies here the amount of royalties to which we're entitled, we could pay for the registry ourselves about fifty times over.
Which if you want to talk irksome, there's a good place to start.
posted by gibletquesterrs at 9:16 AM
<< Home