Gun Registry

The important thing to remember is that when the Liberals brought in this great legislation, the government estimate of costs was about $200,000, I believe.
Typically in government tradition of giving us, the taxpayers, good value for the expense, the expense now is over $4 billion spent, and the damn crooks are still not registering anything, while the farmer who owns a shotgun, in case you try to sleep with his daughter without marrying her, refused to sign up!
No one uses the registration! the police wouldn't be so stupid as to go into any house where there is a problem complaint, and after checking the computer tell the officers- it is OK , there is no gun registered on our computer records!
The whole idea was and is done, and our great Conservative P.M. is simply trying to cut wasteful costs!
The registry never worked and yet to cancel it becomes an impossibility, because it is a government program.
Let it go!

"The only people who seem to say the police don't need it aren't actually police"

incorrect
We have an ongoing gun crisis including firearms-related homicides lately in Toronto, and a law registering firearms has neither deterred these crimes nor helped us solve any of them. None of the guns we know to have been used were registered, although we believe that more than half of them were smuggled into Canada from the United States. The firearms registry is long on philosophy and short on practical results considering the money could be more effectively used for security against terrorism as well as a host of other public safety initiatives

-Ontario Provincial police commisisioner

"Not only that, but I think I remember hearing that police were obligated to run a check against the registry...so that may account for the 9000 hits per day that the registry receives...."

There are actually only about 18 hits per day actively searching the gun registry the other hits are all "automatic" hits that occour whenever anyone is searched for anything.

so ..
can I get a small rifle from some paperworkless place now. ?

or
not

Not yet.

Mind you, you will still need to get a license and pass a back ground check before you can buy a firearm of any kind. Side arms and restricted arms will still require you to register them.

To bad most of the weapons used in gun crimes are smuggled in to the country

I'd really like a .177 to knock down those pesky crows.

they are on sale for like $20 or something at united cash and carry

This yet may be a ballot question in the next election.

The friggn' Liberals in the Senate will hold this up, just you watch.

Riverman wrote:I'd really like a .177 to knock down those pesky crows.

Crows are tough birds.

You will need something with more knock down power than some dinky .177 air rifle. A .22LR at the very least. But I would go with a 22 Hornet or BB loaded 12 guage shot gun.

If you plan on shooting them in the city. then you will need to use a bolt action 22 and use 22 short sub-sonic ammo. and tape a 2L coke bottle on the end of the rifle. It will be absolutely soundless. ( no pesky calls to 911 about someone firing a rifle in the city)

Crows easily die from a .177 air rifle If you hit them in the head.

Deank wrote:Crows easily die from a .177 air rifle If you hit them in the head.

I've been hit by many .177 air rifles and air pistols both BB and pellet. The odd time they would break my skin, but they never made any penetration. Not enough force to pierce flesh.

Unless you purchase a super high velocity air rifle, in which case you need a firearm license and have to register it (hopefully they repeal the long-gun registry)

Deank wrote:Crows easily die from a .177 air rifle If you hit them in the head.

That's easier said than done! I have killed quite a few that way though. For next summer I'm going to pick up a .22 air rifle which will be more effective due to the larger projectile mass. I was told a .177 rifle was available but shooting a rifle in the city....not sure I want to go down that road.

Right now I have a Gamo (Spanish made) .177 that was terrific until it was dropped and broke the muzzle sight.

LivingDead wrote:

Deank wrote:Crows easily die from a .177 air rifle If you hit them in the head.

I've been hit by many .177 air rifles and air pistols both BB and pellet. The odd time they would break my skin, but they never made any penetration. Not enough force to pierce flesh.

Unless you purchase a super high velocity air rifle, in which case you need a firearm license and have to register it (hopefully they repeal the long-gun registry)

I;ve killed gophers, crows, prarie chickens, and one skunk with a .177 pellet gun.

One kid up in The Pas was killed with one as well. Which is actually the reason my wife wont let me buy the kids a pellet gun as it was a friend of hers.

....ahhhh...and why do you wish to kill these crows again? They're 'pesky'?

Deank wrote:"The only people who seem to say the police don't need it aren't actually police"

incorrect
We have an ongoing gun crisis including firearms-related homicides lately in Toronto, and a law registering firearms has neither deterred these crimes nor helped us solve any of them. None of the guns we know to have been used were registered, although we believe that more than half of them were smuggled into Canada from the United States. The firearms registry is long on philosophy and short on practical results considering the money could be more effectively used for security against terrorism as well as a host of other public safety initiatives

-Ontario Provincial police commisisioner

The comment is just about money. The firearms registry isn't supposed to stop handgun crime or deal with smuggled guns. That's not what it does. The gun registry also doesn't stop car breakins or white collar crime or global warming. But that's not what it's meant to do, so who cares? If the money could be better spent elsewhere, I'd like to see what the current annual operating costs are. I believe it can be operated very cheaply and don't see any value in destroying the current information on file, which apparently is going to be done if the registry is stopped. For the most part in my opinion people are against it because it isn't doing something that isn't dealing with a problem that it's not designed to deal with. There are millions of things that it doesn't do because they aren't what it's there for.

I'm not overly in support of the registry because I have zero interaction with it, I just don't really understand the opposition to it.

its around 20ish million per year. Hard to find exact data on it as there are also many "topups" of cash for equipment and such.

I too believe it could be operated for damn little. Its a freakin Database for godsake. $1 mill per year. TOPS.

The Gun Registry was put in place because the Fcuken Liberals said it would cut-down on gun violence.

It never would / will / could / do that!

Its only accomplishment is having wasted TWO BILLION DOLLARS.

It was a political ploy by the Liberals to capitalize on the tragedy in Quebec.

There is no way possible that a registry could prevent something like that.

It hasn't prevented dick!

Deank wrote:its around 20ish million per year. Hard to find exact data on it as there are also many "topups" of cash for equipment and such.

I too believe it could be operated for damn little. Its a freakin Database for godsake. $1 mill per year. TOPS.

Yeah, that's a lot of IT costs. To me it seems like if there's any value in it to police it could be run very cheaply instead of thrown out completely. There seems to be a lot of opposition to it because of the cost, but that shouldn't be tough to fix. It's a strange reaction to me. If people are mad because we spent too much on Globemasters, we don't just disband the military because of cost.

JTF wrote:It hasn't prevented dick!

Probably hasn't. But that's impossible to prove.

It doesn't have any useful information. Any idiot knows that every farmer has a rifle. Duh.

The police want to knoiw if Little Bad Johhy has a Glock and the Registry won't ever know.

That's the point.

umcrouc0 wrote:

JTF wrote:It hasn't prevented dick!

Probably hasn't. But that's impossible to prove.

If it successful, there would be less gun crime...there hasn't been.

JTF wrote:

umcrouc0 wrote:

JTF wrote:It hasn't prevented dick!

Probably hasn't. But that's impossible to prove.

If it successful, there would be less gun crime...there hasn't been.

No, if successful there would be less gun crime today than in a theorhetical alternate universe in which there was no registry. Which is impossible to determine.