Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Sign in to follow this  
betsy

Gun Registry

Recommended Posts

It is a waste of money. And we've seen the amount of money wasted and stolen by this party over the years.

Arrogance? Delusion? Plain stubborness?

Why won't Martin just scrap it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But just think-- if we didn't have the gun registry, we'd probably have people running around shooting people in busy Toronto shopping malls on Boxing Day.

-k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, I bet all those people living in the area of Jane and Finch are sleeping more soundly knowing that the registry is in place. :rolleyes:

And the money??? Well, that $2Billion, if left in taxpayers' pockets, would probably have just been spent on beer and popcorn anyway....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest eureka

If we did not have the Gun Registry and other controls in Canada, just maybe we would be more like New York where there have been 1450 public shooting incidents this year. Twent times the Toronto total!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If we did not have the Gun Registry and other controls in Canada, just maybe we would be more like New York where there have been 1450 public shooting incidents this year. Twent times the Toronto total!

Violence has much more to do with culture than availability of firearms. The shootings in the US are because of their huge slums full of minorities, an underclass with no hope, full of rage and drugs and gangs.

In Canada, firearms violence has increased since the long gun registry was introduced, so you can hardly credit it with doing anything useful. Nor was it ever intended to do anything useful except serve as a political placebo to get votes. And most street violence is because of ethnic gangs, whose culture is more akin to that in the slums of New York than to mainstream Canada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is a waste of money.  And we've seen the amount of money wasted and stolen by this party over the years.

Arrogance? Delusion? Plain stubborness? 

Why won't Martin just scrap it?

Because that would be admitting he was wrong. Martin will NEVER do that. If it requires spending another billion, or another ten billion, he will spend it gladly to avoid having to admit he made a mistake.

After all, it's not like it's his money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yup, I bet all those people living in the area of Jane and Finch are sleeping more soundly knowing that the registry is in place.  :rolleyes:

And the money??? Well, that $2Billion, if left in taxpayers' pockets, would probably have just been spent on beer and popcorn anyway....

Or spending the $2 billion on silly things like putting more cops on the streets to catch more criminals....

...because that ain't liberal. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If we did not have the Gun Registry and other controls in Canada, just maybe we would be more like New York where there have been 1450 public shooting incidents this year. Twent times the Toronto total!

But New York's rate of firearms carnage has always been 20 times higher than Toronto's, if not far more. Crediting the gun registry for making the difference seems a little silly, don't you think?

I guess there are two schools of thought here. One looks at the statistics, finds no appreciable change in gun violence since the registry, and concludes that it's probably not having much effect on rates of gun violence. The other looks at the statistics, finds no appreciable change in gun violence, and concludes that it's a good thing we got the gun registry when we did because otherwise shootings would be through the roof by now!

Who knows. Who really knows.

Well, Paul Martin announced last month that Toronto gun violence has become a national crisis, and announced plans for a "ban on handguns." Reading between the lines, I think one can conclude he's recognized that the gun registry just isn't cutting it.

-k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, Paul Martin announced last month that Toronto gun violence has become a national crisis, and announced plans for a "ban on handguns."  Reading between the lines, I think one can conclude he's recognized that the gun registry just isn't cutting it.
A ban on handguns is not the same as a registry for hundguns. In fact, banning handguns eliminates the need for a registry (think of all the money saved) because there would be no legal reason for a person to carry a handgun.

A complete ban would also make it easier for police to confiscate any weapons discovered because they are no more 'hunting' or 'target shooting' loop holes. The police officer shot in Laval was shot with a gun that was only supposed to be used during 'hunting' season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is a waste of money.  And we've seen the amount of money wasted and stolen by this party over the years.

Arrogance? Delusion? Plain stubborness? 

Why won't Martin just scrap it?

The Gun Registry in principle is a good idea. If it wasn't so good why did many police associations across the country support it.

And for those who say gun violence hasn't lessened across the country, first, there will always be gun violence no matter what you do and secondly, this is due to the more power that gangs are gaining in the bigger cities across the country. This was going to happen with or without a gun registry and a prime reason for this is the terrible poverty in these city slum areas as Argus calls them. Something has to be done to help fight this poverty. What is happening is a lot of the young people see the gangs as the only way out of poverty, and what has to happen is to give these people hope to escape poverty without turning to gangs and the associated violence including gun violence.

The biggest problem with the gun registry is that the Liberals royally screwed up and it turned into a disaster. It needs to be streamlined into something that can work for Canada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If we did not have the Gun Registry and other controls in Canada, just maybe we would be more like New York where there have been 1450 public shooting incidents this year. Twent times the Toronto total!

Do you have anything to back up your numbers? Excuse my skepticism, but your past.....

1) Doesn't NYC have about 2.5 times the population of Toronto?

2) This Canadian gun control site states that have been 48 homocides by guns in Toronto from January to November 2005, but it has nothing on "public shooting incidents". Are you asserting that there has been 48 homicides in 11 months, but only 24 or 25 wounded due to gunfire? (1450 divided by 20 = 72.5)

3) Your "shooting incidents" statement is vague. How many of these "shooting incidents" involved people defending themself, their family, or their property--both Toronto and NYC? The MSM media rarely reports it (it doesn't suit their agenda), but I come across many many stories on the internet of crooks getting shot for trying to break in, steal, attack, or even rape someone in their home. I'm sure there are many of these self-defense incidents that I don't come across To be fair to the MSM, some of these stories come from smaller centers., and perhaps not a big deal on the nat'l scene of a country with 295 million people.

4) Why do you want to disarm my elderly law-abiding grandparents, one set that lives on a farm 16 km from the city, and the other set that lives in a hamlet (less than 100 people) 40 km from the nearest RCMP station--especially when their hamlet is near a certain "reserve" of people well-known in Saskatchewan for their high crime, violence, and murder rates? :angry: :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sparhawk:

A complete ban would also make it easier for police to confiscate any weapons discovered because they are no more 'hunting' or 'target shooting' loop holes.

A few weeks back I posted stats from the UK govt's Home Office website. It showed a large increase in crime since they banned handguns--I specifically remember the site stating that break-ins (or was it robberies?) had risen 92% in 4 years. Since some on this site (not saying it was you--I can't remember who the people were) couldn't attack my source (Fox News is all lies!), they claimed that the UK was simply recording crime stats differently (but offered no proof), thus the near double increase in 4 years. :rolleyes:

I just came across this from the BBC in 2001:

A new study suggests the use of handguns in crime rose by 40% in the two years after the weapons were banned.  The research....has concluded that existing laws are targeting legitimate users of firearms rather than criminals.  the report suggests that despite the restrictions on ownership the use of handguns in crime is rising.  The Centre for Defence Studies at Kings College in London, which carried out the research, said the number of crimes in which a handgun was reported increased from 2,648 in 1997/98 to 3,685 in 1999/2000. 

It also said there was no link between high levels of gun crime and areas where there were still high levels of lawful gun possession.  Of the 20 police areas with the lowest number of legally held firearms, 10 had an above average level of gun crime.  And of the 20 police areas with the highest levels of legally held guns only two had armed crime levels above the average. 

The [Countryside Alliance's Campaign for Shooting (legitimate sporting and farming organization)] director, David Bredin, said: "It is crystal clear from the research that the existing gun laws do not lead to crime reduction and a safer place....He said the rise was largely down to successful smuggling of illegal guns into the country.

Looks similar to the UK's Home Office figure of 92% in 4 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE] The police officer shot in Laval was shot with a gun that was only supposed to be used during 'hunting' season.

Yes,because some moronic judge gave him the permission to carry the rifle...a high-powered rifle at that...even though they already know this man had been making threats and harrassing police women! Another Liberal appointee, I bet!

Just shows you, gun registry does not do anything at all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If we did not have the Gun Registry and other controls in Canada, just maybe we would be more like New York where there have been 1450 public shooting incidents this year. Twent times the Toronto total!

Get a life! The gun registry has not taken guns out of the hands of one criminal in Canada. Now why is that? Could it be that the criminals don't register their unregistered weapons anyway, DAH?

This gun registry bureaucracy is just another bunch of bureaucrats that serves no useful purpose other than to employ more Liberals. It gives Martin another place to employ the Party loyalists as a reward for services rendered. Similar to the appointments to the Supreme Court, nothing but political hacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A complete ban would also make it easier for police to confiscate any weapons discovered because they are no more 'hunting' or 'target shooting' loop holes. The police officer shot in Laval was shot with a gun that was only supposed to be used during 'hunting' season.

Illegal guns can already be confiscated instantly. The kind of violence people fear are the kind coming from illegal guns. The gun in Laval was a rifle. Are you suggesting now, a complete ban on all rifles as well as hand guns?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Illegal guns can already be confiscated instantly. The kind of violence people fear are the kind coming from illegal guns.
If that is the case then a further hand gun ban seems unnecessary - increasing the penalities (actual - not theoretical) for illegal handgun possetion should be sufficient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Gun Registry in principle is a good idea.  If it wasn't so good why did many  police associations across the country support it. 

It is a tool. It isn't a good tool. But it's better than no tool. The police like the idea of being able to check on their computer to find out if there is a gun at the residence they're going to. Unfortunately, the registry was so incompetently set upk, so grossly inefficient, that it's unreliable, and of course, it ignores the illegal guns. Still, it's better than nothing.

On the other hand, if you asked those police if two billion dollars would be better spent on a registry, or on more cops, prosecutors, courts and prisons, I have no doubt whatever they'd want to dump the registry.

And for those who say gun violence hasn't lessened across the country, first, there will always be gun violence no matter what you do and secondly, this is due to the more power that gangs are gaining in the bigger cities across the country.  This was going to happen with or without a gun registry and a prime reason for this is the terrible poverty in these city slum areas as Argus calls them.

There are numerous reasons. One is poverty, but what causes poverty? I would suggest that a prime problem is the importation of tens of thousands of unskilled third world residents every year, most of whom speak no English. Second, there is the gangsta culture which so many young black males grow up on, with an abscence of positive male role models due to the enormously high number of unmarried mothers in the Black community.

Another cause is alienationi from society. Unlike in the US, we don't have an underclass, and the alienation among these young men are a result of the fact they are not of our culture, most of them, and feel like outsiders - which, well, they are.

But let's not forget the lax gun laws, the lax enforcement of them, the lax prosecution and lax sentences. And the revolving door justice system with cushy prisons and mandatory parole laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest eureka

MB, you should perhaps look at Kimmy's, points which are valid. We don't know of gun use would have gone through the roof without the restrictions. Indications are that they might have done.

You might also better use your head for thinking than working out meaningless mathematical relations. Oh, and your eyes for reading. The figure of 1450 gun incidents in New York comes from this morning's paper.

Equally, the figures for different areas in Britain are meaningless unless you can show what they would have been earlier for comparison. What does it tell you if one area has more gun crimes tha another related to ratio of legal guns. It is possible and likely that legal gun ownership is much higher in areas that are more affluent and not subject to the social generators of crime.

Your site is akin to the NRA in its membership and hardly a source that would apply logic to its output.

Gun use was rising everywhere with the easy availability of weapons. Two years following a ban is no test. And, there is not the slightest doubt that many incidents are from legally pssessed handguns.

In the area I live in there have been three murders with handguns in the last two years. All were legal guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit off topic:

Did anyone see Ted Nugent on CNBC's Big Idea with Donny Deutsch tonight? I only caught about the last 20 minutes, but they had a debate about banning guns in the US. They discussed Iraq; Deutsch said he was glad that Saddam was gone, but vaguely claimed that it could have been done another way. Nugent complained about the lies of the MSM and said he is skeptical of nearly everything they report. Deutsch (who claims he is a purple-stater...a combination of blue and red states, i.e., a centrist, but he's not) got upset about that. He said he was tired of the so-called liberal media claims because of - you guessed it - Fox News. Guess Donny missed that media bias study from UCLA (Dec. 14/05)...which concluded that only 2 of the 20 major media outlets studied scored right of the average US voter - Fox News' "Special Report With Brit Hume" and The Washington Times.

Nugent said he might run for Governor of Michigan in 2010. He used terms like "personal responsibility, "less govt", etc.

He wasn't talking liberal. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it may seem to be a tool. That the cops would know who has a gun in their name before going to a household. But actually, that is one deadly mistake.

It offers FALSE SECURITY. The cops will tend to put their guard down. Just look what happened to the cop who died recently. And she was even wearing a vest.

As a deterrent? No way! The crooks are already well-armed...and of course they won't register.

A crook is more likely to think thrice before hitting your home if he is not sure as to how you will react....if you've got a gun in there.

The cops already said it is a waste of money. That it is better to spend that money to equip and increase our police force.

You know, this is a fatalistic point of view that I'm going to say, but the registry is a one of the surest way of knowing and keeping track of who among the citizenry are armed. Some banana republics systematically remove arms from its citizenry before plunging into dictatorship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gun registry is a crock and hasn't solved anything. We need a boot camp at the very least if and when we can round them up. There are hundres of people who know of these guys are but don't co-operate with the police.

Throwing millions at after school programs won't change a criminal mind set, that mind set starts at home. We need to get much tougher with sentencing, parole, and no cushy jail cells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canadian justice is a crock too. It should become common knowledge that if a handgun is in your hand during a crime, a noose will be around your neck when you get caught. Or maybe a firing squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest eureka

What question, Monty?

Countryside Alliance for Shooting. Did you read their comments on what was no more than a statistical survey without conclusions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Illegal guns can already be confiscated instantly. The kind of violence people fear are the kind coming from illegal guns.
If that is the case then a further hand gun ban seems unnecessary - increasing the penalities (actual - not theoretical) for illegal handgun possetion should be sufficient.

What needs to happen is this:

If you are caught with a gun on your person downtown, you are immediately arrested and slapped into jail. There will be no bail. You will be convicted, and sent immediately to prison, without parole.

What happens now is that you're arrested, processed, and immediately released on bail. A year or so later, your attorney works out a deal with the Crown where you plead to a lesser crime, and get a minor sentence, say, 6 months, but you're out on parole after two months. So you spend a couple of months relaxing with your buddies in the clink, getting fed well, watching satellite TV, working out, getting overnight visits from your bitches, and then you're out again and back with your gang.

I think we should look into hard labour for all firearm offences, too. No more sitting around playing video games with the buds in jail. Make them break rocks and dig ditches. They'll be a lot more reluctant to carry a gun around in future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...