Osprey Media Group Inc. - Orillia Packet & Times

Osprey Media Group Inc. - Orillia Packet & Times - The Gloves are Off

Thursday's all candidates meeting must have been an off-night for Simcoe North's Liberal candidate and incumbent Paul DeVillers or it was an example of the inherent arrogance that comes from being elected three times in succession.

DeVillers is quoted as saying that he was "offended that voters in Simcoe North are considering Conservative Peter Stock". It is one thing for a politician criticize another Party or even its candidate for their views on any or all platform planks or values. Indeed, it is why there are all candidates meetings. But berating the electorate for giving careful consideration to any candidate or any party is quite another.

I thought, that back at the beginning of this campaign, the Liberal party had put aside the attack strategy of calling it unCanadian to consider any party or view that was not originated by the Liberal Team.

DeVillers comment makes one wonder just what type of government we would get if the Liberals are elected for the fourth time. I suggest it means if you think the last government was arrogant, you ain't seen nothing yet.

From my perspective, DeVillers desire to condemn any thought process not orginated by a fully sanctioned Liberal may not be a reason to vote for Simcoe North's Conservative candidate Peter Stock, but it is a reason for not voting for a Liberal.

The Globe and Mail

The Globe and Mail

The Conservative's promise to scrap the gun registry in favour of a sexual offenders registry is to paraphrase Neil Armstrong, "one small step for a political party but a giant step for Canadian justice".

Scrapping of the gun registry, particularly the long gun portion, in favour of a sex-offender registry will prove in the long run to be far more useful in solving crimes as well as provide far more protection for Canadians. Personally, I would like to see estimates of the costs of maintaining the hand gun portion of the registry before it was scrapped. However, the concept of registering every hunting rifle and shotgun in the land cannot be justified as an effective preventative measure or an effective use of government funds.

The federal government has been far too long in putting in place a nation-wide methodology for keeping track of those who would sexually prey on others, particular our children.

There are those who would argue that when you pay your time for your crime you should regain total freedom, including the ability to move about freely without being required to report your whereabouts to any government agency. I would argue not in the case of sexual offenses. The recidivism rate for these crimes is historically high, which dictates the need for restrictions on the freedoms of those who commit such crimes. Harsh as that sounds, it is nowhere as harsh as the impact of such crimes on the victims.

From my perspective a major design criteria for a sex-offender registry must be the inclusion of links to similar registries in every other country with similar files. This requirement is particularly crucial for providing an integrated approach in North American for keeping track of sexual offenders.

Harper's suggestion of a 'three strikes and you are jailed forever' rule being applied to sexual crimes is a too lenient for some of these crimes; e.g. in the case of sex-crimes against children, it should be two strikes and you are out. Another, major requirement of the law should be the elimination of any ability of a judge to minimise the sentence.

Lastly, in conjunction with the elimination of the gun registry, the Conservatives must also pass a nationwide law making the use of a gun in any manner, in the course of committing a crime, a criminal offense with a mandatory full five year sentence to be served at completion of the sentence for the crime committed.