To get good insightful answers, how the question is framed matters. I missed an opportunity on Thursday
There is no other explanation. They also have written Anne McLellan off with this anti-Canadian Forces Ad.
The Military Ad is very saddening to watch. I was in the Forces for a few years and was very proud to wear my uniform in the urban areas. The Military has very strict and clear rules about rifles outside of garrison (aka bases and armouries) and it is simple. They do not go outside except in very rare circumstances (formal parades) and even then they go out without ammunition or bolts (the firing mechanism). The only time this would happen is if a state of emergency is declared. When Canadians need assistance, the main group of personel that the federal government has is the Forces. If Toronto requires the army, they have to wait days for the army to do the logistics to move into Toronto and then drive to Toronto from Petawawa. If there are not troops in Petawawa, then they have to come from Shilo or Gagetown. Either way, by the time the army arrives, the difference they can make in a crisis is minimal. Harper’s plan is sensable as it places the resources to help where they are needed. That ad is extremely misleading and a smear against all the brave men and women that serve their country. I wonder if Martin has problem with police forces having firearms? We all know he does not want Border Guards to have firearms ’cause it would be bad if they actually could stop guns at the border right?