Gun Registry

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.

JTF wrote: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.

So if it has zero information that the police need, why do they support it? If the police chiefs want it there must be a reason for wanting it.

umcrouc0 wrote:

JTF wrote: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.

So if it has zero information that the police need, why do they support it? If the police chiefs want it there must be a reason for wanting it.

Because Police Chiefs are appointed by politicians.

JTF wrote:It hasn't prevented dick!

considering some people are sent to jail for not having properly registered weapons I would say perhaps it has caused dick.

AGEsAces wrote:

umcrouc0 wrote:

JTF wrote: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.

So if it has zero information that the police need, why do they support it? If the police chiefs want it there must be a reason for wanting it.

Because Police Chiefs are appointed by politicians.

Politicians are voting to get rid of the registry and the association of police chiefs are fighting to keep it. If they were in the pockets of politicians wouldn't they support getting rid of it?

why golly gee... the officers should have just checked the gun registry to see if there was a weapon registered at the house
http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/winnipeg/2009/11/06/11659151.html

Here's the position of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/we-lose-the-gun-registry-at-our-peril/article1350091/

If there's no value to them in having it, why bother putting out any statement? If it can be run cheaply and takes almost zero effort to register, I still don't get the opposition. So far it hasn't been shown to be run cheaply. But from a non-cost perspective, I still haven't seen an argument on why to actually get rid of it and destroy the current information.

Deank wrote:why golly gee... the officers should have just checked the gun registry to see if there was a weapon registered at the house
[url=http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/winnipeg/2009/11/06/11659151.html

http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/winnipeg/2009/11/06/11659151.html[/quote[/url]]
Again, that has nothing to do with the registry. You could also say they should have checked their phone records to see if they had ordered pizza from gondola lately to help determine if there was a gun in the house.

reading that it seems the only legitimate claim for it being worthwhile is that...

If its not properly registered then we can charge them and confiscate the weapon.

not that I am dismissing that as a good reason, but other then that none of their reasons seem to hold any water.

-illegal guns begin as legal guns....Legal in another country ..maybe... as an enormous amount of guns are smuggled into our country from the USA.
-Every gun tells a story and the registration system often gives us a starting point in our investigations....well perhaps if police investigated and acted on stolen weapon reports more vigourously they would not have to come back and do an investigation once a gun was used in a crime.

-We recently had a case where an individual made threats to staff at the Children's Aid. Because of the system, we knew he had firearms and were able to obtain a warrant to seize them
... seriously police dudes.. if someone is making threats... assume they have weapons and approach as neccessary.

-Some of the most important queries are about domestic violence calls, which every police service in Canada receives. The registry allows us to check for the presence of household firearms – a vital piece of information for protecting victims, as well as the responding officers.

... welll fuuck me if that aint the stupidest cop on the planet if he checks the gun registry and nothing is listed so he responds without thinking that perhaps there is something there. In this case, the Unknown is far more dangerous then the known and in cases involving violence police should always expect the unknown.

[quote="umcrouc0"]

Deank wrote:why golly gee... the officers should have just checked the gun registry to see if there was a weapon registered at the house
http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/winnipeg/2009/11/06/11659151.html[/quote]
Again, that has nothing to do with the registry. You could also say they should have checked their phone records to see if they had ordered pizza from gondola lately to help determine if there was a gun in the house.

thats exactly my point... police need to focus on safety and their own protection.. they get a report of a gun.. they damn well better assume there is a gun.

They get a report of threats or violence... assume weapons of all sorts are available. Dont just respond to a violent crime and check the registry and say... ahh its good.. no guns are present.. sh1t like that gets cops killed.

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

That's correct. Just like mosquitos.

Riverman wrote:

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

That's correct. Just like mosquitos.

The reason that I asked was that I have a fondness for crows based on a 'pet' crow that our family had a relationship with at the lake.

I believe that crows have an intelligence that's equal to pigs. They're very smart.

If pigs are so damn smart how come they have not figured out how to make themselves less tastey?

There is no big deal having to register as an owner of a long gun. We register all sorts of things today at the time of purchase. The problem was the province's refusal to use an existing agency, like the automobile registration to allow the set up .
The federal government had to start from scratch and we allk know that any government agency cannot do anything for a reasonable cost.
It seems to me to be mind boggling , not to have your name registered as an owner, similar to hand gun legislation. There wouldn't have been much cost if the long gun rules were an extention of hand gun rules! Who cares if most owners were law abiding? That isn't the issue!
Who complained? Harper and all of his farmer votes?

Well it is not the fact That they have to be registered , it is the fact that again the goverment creates a branch of more bureaucracy . One more level of civil servants in charge of a huge database . The fact that it doe,s nothing to solve crime or prevent it is what it was sold as .

There is no legitimate movement in Canada attempting to remove vehicles from the hands of law-abiding vehicle owners. However, if the Coalition for Gun Control (a legitimate and powerful advocacy group) or other inner city groups had it their way, all guns would be banned in Canada - and this is their goal.

Gun owners know they are a minority and should another mass gun crime occur (which the registration system does nothing to prevent), the current system is only one step away from removing all their rights. Its not that the registration process is complex or costly; Its the fact that the trend has been to continuously tighten the chokehold on firearm owners without due cause. The fact that long-guns designed for hunting are regulated, means that it would just take one vote in Parliament, fueld by emotion and not reason, following a major gang incident to make all fall under ''Restriced'' - just like in Australia.

Even Wayne Easter, Minister of Justice at the time and the one who brought it in, voted against keeping it last week.

He says it's not doing what it was intended to do.

Wayne Easter brought in the LGR ?

He was Minister of Justice at the time.

From Wikipedia

The Canadian Firearms Registry is part of the Canadian Firearms Program. It requires the registration of all guns in Canada. It was introduced by the Liberal government of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and implemented by successive Justice Ministers Allan Rock and Anne McLellan. It requires all usable firearms in Canada to be registered. This was an effort to reduce crime by making every gun traceable. The annual operating costs of the program are reported to be between $15 – $80 million. ^[1][2][3]
Any person wishing to obtain a firearm must first acquire a Possession and Acquisition Licence or PAL.^[4] The PAL carries a fee of $60 for non-restricted, $80 for restricted, and is renewable every five years. Expiry dates are set on the holder's birthday following the fifth anniversary of the initial issue of the licence.
Is this wrong .

[quote="Deank"]

umcrouc0 wrote:

Deank wrote:why golly gee... the officers should have just checked the gun registry to see if there was a weapon registered at the house
http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/winnipeg/2009/11/06/11659151.html[/quote]
Again, that has nothing to do with the registry. You could also say they should have checked their phone records to see if they had ordered pizza from gondola lately to help determine if there was a gun in the house.

thats exactly my point... police need to focus on safety and their own protection.. they get a report of a gun.. they damn well better assume there is a gun.

They get a report of threats or violence... assume weapons of all sorts are available. Dont just respond to a violent crime and check the registry and say... ahh its good.. no guns are present.. sh1t like that gets cops killed.

I'm sure they do assume guns could be present. But if they police say that they want to be able to check, I don't really see how anyone can tell them they actually don't because the information isn't important to them. I don't know all of what they use the registry for, but they seem to want it. So I don't understand the push to get rid of it if the only people who have any use for it are saying that it's good for them to have. Now the public safety minister is saying the RCMP is skewing data on the database's use. Why exactly is the government getting into a fight with the RCMP over how useful the RCMP thinks the registry is? The whole situation's got me really confused.

Dean, I can see that the registry isn't going to give police all the information they need to deal with a situation and that they don't take lack of information as meaning there are definitely no firearms. What I don't see is an argument for why having a gun not registered is more useful to the police than having it registered and why never having any information on a situation is better than sometimes having some additional information.

The present goverment is trying to appease it rural roots by getting rid of the registry but has found some new suburban votes in the proccess.

Harper is doing what he said he would do! Eliminate waste in the government.
How in the heck can someone buy a shotgun and not have his/her name in some sort of registry?
No one would or should complain. Certainly this is as important as registering a vehicle?

The Jane-Finch community in Toronto, which has one of the highest rates of gun violence in Canada has not one single person registered on the Gun Registry.

The fcuken thing doesn't help squat!!

ARen't we talking 2 idfferent things? One is the register of gun owners and the other is the registry of every firearm in the country.

Long before the gun registry, it was put in place that a Firearms Acquisition Certificate was necessay to purchase a firearm. This was separate from the requirements for owning a restricted weapon (pistol). I had an FAC as I needed one to purchase a shotgun back in the good old days. Prior to that, I just had to be over 18. The FAC required a cursory check on my background (I was not a criminal and still remain that way and I am of sound mind, in spite of what you may think)

The gun registry requires the registration of every firearm in the country, which provides no practical purpose. The intent of the registry, as detailed by the Liberals, was to reduce crime involving firearms. Can someone explain to me how thats working out for them?

LOL....ya...hand guns have been restricted since the 30's...sure has had a effect eh.