There's been a lot of debate over my post in Dec. 2009 titled "Phil McColeman: Soft on Crime." So I thought I'd follow up.The Canadian Police Association and the Canadian Association of Police Boards have both decided that the Firearms Registry DOES prevent crime. This is despite what certain armchair pundits claim. Yet Phil McColeman does not support the continuation of this valuable tool. In fact, he has spoken up in Parliament, calling opposition members "bullies" for fighting to keep the Registry.
At the same time, Phil has sent out numerous flyers to the constituents of Brant claiming to be "Tough on Crime." The fact is that Harper's tough on crime strategy involving harsher jail sentences WILL NOT reduce crime, but WILL be very expensive. This is a proven fact.
Therefore, while Phil claims to be "Tough on Crime," he is not actually doing anything to lower the crime rate. All he advocates is 1) scrapping a valuable crime-fighting tool, and 2) replacing it with a very expensive strategy that will accomplish nothing.
Phil McColeman is NOT tough on crime. If he claims to be tough on crime he is lying or ignorant.
I encourage Brant students to participate in Phil's Public Safety Essay Contest by writing about the efficacy of gun control compared to the efficacy of harsh prison sentences.
1 comment:
When a politician is said to have misled the electorate, it means one of two things: Either he doesn't know what he is talking about, and is incompetent and doesn't deserve to serve, or he is lying and not fit to serve. (John Rudy 2010)
Post a Comment
All comments will be posted except for instances of profanity, spam, hate speech, defamation, etc.