Online Petition to Scrap the Long Gun Registry

[HS-748 2A]

I have a solution; The Municipal Gun Registry; Montreal and the GTA can keep the registry. It can be municipal for the municipalities that want it and they can pay for it with their property taxes.

I petition they leave us hicks from the stix alone.

48

(not a registered gun to my name..)

[Topspin]

mcrit

Rabid describes the NRA and similar pro-gun people, not people who support gun control. How many threads on here (this one for instance) are started by gun control supporters compared to the pro-gun people? Go ahead and count them...I'll wait for an answer.

I think he was referring to the fact that the gun control people do not give an inch. Regardless of what are firearms laws are, they are not enforced anyways. Who knows how well they would do if they were enforced, I think they would be fine if they were, and the LPC campaign of trying to ban handguns was a little bit carried away. Call that one a fumbled political football.

But regardless all the registry does is inconvenience those that have the moral grounds to try and follow the law and waste copious amounts of tax payers dollars.

1998 – BETWEEN 7.2 AND 11 MILLION GUNS IN CANADA – JUSTICE DEPT.

3.2 Key Projections - 3.2.1 Volumetrics

* “The federal SDM [Service Delivery Models] assumes – based on cumulative research evidence – that the number of firearm owners and firearms will – in reality – fall between the low and medium range. [Footnote #2 - Surveys undertaken from 1989 and 1998 have indicated household ownership to be in decline, ownership was recorded at a high of 33% in 1992 and 17% in 1997 according to an Environics Survey – Focus Canada; initial results of the 1998 Angus Reid survey do not significantly affect prior analyses and findings.”]
* The following are the baseline volumetric assumptions:

Canada
Low Range Estimates

= 2,400,000 firearms owners

= 7,200,000 firearms
Medium Range Estimates

= 3,100,000 firearms owners

= 9,000,000 firearms
High Range Estimates

= 3,800,000 firearms owners

= 11,000,000 firearms

2 billion divided by 11 million = $181.81 for each registration. That's an extraordinarily expensive worthless piece of paper, even by government standards. Of course probably only half of those are registered, so the figures just keep spiraling up.

[Rockie]

Vancouver is becoming the wild west with killings most every day how come the gun control laws are not working here?

It's the laws that aren't working Cat, not gun control. As the gun lobby is so fond of saying, "it's not the guns, it's the people using them". We need effective laws that give the police the tools to shut down organized gang activity and courts that have the backbone to uphold them. Gun control laws used vigorously and properly are just one tool that would enable that.

[Rockie]

I have a solution; The Municipal Gun Registry; Montreal and the GTA can keep the registry. It can be municipal for the municipalities that want it and they can pay for it with their property taxes.

I petition they leave us hicks from the stix alone.

48

(not a registered gun to my name..)

I think yfly had it right when he said opposition to gun control is rooted in an unwillingness to take responsibility for the weapons in your possession. You know, just in case they escape your possession.

[xsbank]

I'll raise you one and call:

"The federal government introduced a bill in the Senate on Wednesday to abolish the long-gun registry.

"It's totally inefficient and ineffective against crime," Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan, told reporters on Parliament Hill.

"We believe the long-gun registry as a device simply does not work … It's a misdirection of resources," he said.

"I know there are a lot of members in the NDP, some members in the Liberal Party who have shared that view, who campaigned on that view, have spoken publicly on that view and we hope to achieve their support for that."

98 per cent of bills introduced in House

Introducing a bill in the Senate is unusual — 98 per cent of bills are presented in the House of Commons.

Van Loan said the bill was introduced in the Senate because the House already had a heavy legislative agenda.

Some observers said the move is likely more strategic — the Conservatives can blame the Liberal-dominated Senate if the bill is voted down.

However, Kory Teneycke, current Director of Communication for the Canadian Prime Minister's office, told CBC News, that with 18 new Conservative senators appointed in December, the bill stands a better chance of passing in the Senate than the House.

Change in strategy for Tories

Moreover, Wednesday's proposed bill marks a change in strategy for the Harper government.

It had been backing Bill C-301, introduced by Saskatchewan Conservative MP Garry Breitkreuz (Yorkton-Melville), a rabid opponent of the gun registry.

His bill proposed ending the registration of rifles and shotguns, as well as softening controls on machine guns, by allowing people to transport fully automatic and semi-automatic assault guns to public shooting ranges.

That bill has been contentious, however, and opposed by the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP), as well as majority of Canadians, according to a 2001 poll.

The revised legislation introduced Wednesday would end the gun registry, but doesn't include the relaxation of controls on machine guns.

Strong opposition to Bill C-301

Observers said it is designed to be more palatable to Canadians, who had voiced strong concerns about Bill C-301.

Breitkreuz's bill is scheduled to be debated in the House of Commons beginning May 4.

It goes beyond ending the gun registry by extending the term of all gun licences to 10 to 12 years, as well as allowing licensed owners to get as many handguns and restricted semi-automatic tactical or military weapons as they want over a period of 10-year period without requiring approval from the chief firearms officer.

Wendy Cukier, co-founder and president of the Coalition for Gun Control, said that bill would effectively dismantle gun control in Canada.

Rifles such as the Ruger that Marc Lepine used to kill 14 women at L'École Polytechnique in Montreal in 1989 would no longer have to be registered if that bill is passed, she said.

In a March 9 letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, CACP president Steven Chabot said Bill C-301 "would seriously compromise a system that is working to the betterment of personal, community and police officer safety.

"All guns are potentially dangerous. All gun owners need to be licensed. All guns need to be registered and gun owners need to be accountable for their firearms. We oppose Bill C-301 as a retrogressive proposal that cannot, in any way benefit the safety and security of Canadians."

Chabot pointed out that rifles and shotguns are the weapons most often used in domestic homicides and suicides.

A 2001 Gallup poll found that 63 per cent of Canadians believe gun ownership should be made illegal for ordinary citizens, while 61 per cent favoured stricter laws governing the sale of firearms."

"Rifles such as the Ruger that Marc Lepine used to kill 14 women at L'École Polytechnique in Montreal in 1989 would no longer have to be registered if that bill is passed, she said." Or "Chabot pointed out that rifles and shotguns are the weapons most often used in domestic homicides and suicides."

Didn't you just call pro-gun supporters rabid? Right. In fact, according to Statistic Canada, the weapon of choice in all homicides is the baseball bat, guns are used in less than half of all murders. The murder rate stays the same around 500+ per year yet 100,000 die each year of cancer and heart disease. Gee, do you think the the 2 billion might have been better spent on healthcare? But then Rockie and his ilk would all feel insecure if there was something out there that was not licensed.

2 billion and counting, all to make Rockie feel warm and fuzzy. A typical example of bullsh*t baffles brains. Every other example Rockie gave of licensing has a clearly defined goal that is measurable. Why are there no statistics to support how effective the gun-control program is, or I hope, WAS, that is, beyond the proven ability to spend vast amounts of my tax money?

[Rockie]

"If you're found here tonight, you'll be found here tomorrow."
Smith & Wesson

Rockie....one only has to look at what happened in Australia.

No matter how far, or how wide I roam....

One only has to look at Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Zimbabwe, Congo, Ivory Coast, Pakistan, Haiti, Algeria, Nigeria, Georgia, Sri Lanka, Ethiopia, Syria, Lebanon, United States, Afghanistan, Mexico, Columbia, Chechnya...

Thanks, but I like Canada the way it is.

[Rockie]

"It had been backing Bill C-301, introduced by Saskatchewan Conservative MP Garry Breitkreuz (Yorkton-Melville), a rabid opponent of the gun registry."

This is a quote from the article you just posted xsbank.

[Topspin]

Vancouver is becoming the wild west with killings most every day how come the gun control laws are not working here?

It's the laws that aren't working Cat, not gun control. As the gun lobby is so fond of saying, "it's not the guns, it's the people using them". We need effective laws that give the police the tools to shut down organized gang activity and courts that have the backbone to uphold them. Gun control laws used vigorously and properly are just one tool that would enable that.

Precisely. The long gun registry is not a form of gun control in any way. That two billion dollars would be much better served trying to block the massive inflow of illegal guns from the states, and as a bonus you can also pick up drugs, counterfeit goods and other forms of smuggling. That would help keep our country safe, the gun registry does not.

[Topspin]

It had been backing Bill C-301, introduced by Saskatchewan Conservative MP Garry Breitkreuz (Yorkton-Melville), a rabid opponent of the gun registry.

His bill proposed ending the registration of rifles and shotguns, as well as softening controls on machine guns, by allowing people to transport fully automatic and semi-automatic assault guns to public shooting ranges.

That bill has been contentious, however, and opposed by the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP), as well as majority of Canadians, according to a 2001 poll.

You wonder why they don't support it? Fully automatic weapons should be banned outright anyway, screw grandfather clauses.

"Rifles such as the Ruger that Marc Lepine used to kill 14 women at L'École Polytechnique in Montreal in 1989 would no longer have to be registered if that bill is passed, she said." Or "Chabot pointed out that rifles and shotguns are the weapons most often used in domestic homicides and suicides."

So after the dust clears, you can say, "Yup, he owned that gun." ??? Long gun registration does nothing to prevent this sort of thing anyway, besides the fact that it's the honor system. I still own many guns registered to another person, to stop the wasting of even more money by the CFC.


Long Gun Registry = CATSA - Provides a feeling of security to the general public who have no idea how it works anyway, and the utterly unbelievable price tag it comes with.

[Rockie]

That would help keep our country safe, the gun registry does not.

This is a common claim used by the pro-gun crowd as justification for their cause. You will be shocked to know that nothing by itself keeps our country safe. However, as I've been saying all along the gun registry is one component that contributes to it. Maybe not in ways that you can understand, but it does just the same. The majority of Canadians do understand this.

Why don't gun owners want to take responsibility for their guns?

[Topspin]

That would help keep our country safe, the gun registry does not.

This is a common claim used by the pro-gun crowd as justification for their cause. You will be shocked to know that nothing by itself keeps our country safe. However, as I've been saying all along the gun registry is one component that contributes to it. Maybe not in ways that you can understand, but it does just the same. The majority of Canadians do understand this.

Let's look at a theoretical example of the gun registry in action.

We have a firearms owner, call him John Smith. John has a couple of 30-30's in plastic cases in his closet with padlocks on them. This is technically legal for not restricted firearms, behind one secure barrier that is locked.
Now John has the unfortunate luck to have a break-in, his guns get stolen. He phones the cops in the morning and reports it, 99.99% of the time it ends there, John did not break the law. Let's extrapolate a bit though, next week one of the rifles turns up as a murder weapon. 99.99% of the time nothing will change at all. What is John going to be charged with? Accessory to murder? He followed the law to the letter.
So for a worst case scenario, CFC decides John shouldn't own guns anymore. They give him notice and ask him to turn in his firearms before X date or have them confiscated. John says, "Hey, I want to keep my guns." So he "sells" them to his range buddy John Doe, he doesn't even have to store them in John Does safe, because the laws are not enforced anyway.

Net change.........Nothing.

How in anyway could the Long Gun Registry have prevented the Montreal Massacre? It doesn't do anything anyway, like I said, it's the honor system. Before I bothered going through all the red tape & fees of obtaining an FAC/PAL, I owned many guns....I simply registered in a friends name. We have peace officers in the prairies that have publicly announced their refusal to enforce registration laws.

If this money was redirected at stopping illegal firearms, creating stricter storage & transport laws, and actual general oversight on such laws, I would shut right up. Things like that make the country more safe.

Please cite one example of how the Long Gun Registry makes the lives of Canadians any more safe, as I apparently, "Do not understand."

Why don't gun owners want to take responsibility for their guns?

Gun owners take great responsibility for there guns, but this has nothing to do with the registry.

[yfly]

That would help keep our country safe, the gun registry does not.

This is a common claim used by the pro-gun crowd as justification for their cause. You will be shocked to know that nothing by itself keeps our country safe. However, as I've been saying all along the gun registry is one component that contributes to it. Maybe not in ways that you can understand, but it does just the same. The majority of Canadians do understand this.

Why don't gun owners want to take responsibility for their guns?

I am pro-gun as I don't believe I should have to give up heirlooms, stop hunting or surrender the ability to meet a hostile act with equal force. I am all for the registry though for exactly the reasons you state Rockie. It, by itself , is not the solution, but it is a component that contributes to gun control.

I can't understand why most can't see that that the registry was designed to enforce responsibility and accountability for gun ownership.

The opinion of one wack-job MP is just that.

[Cat Driver]

One only has to look at Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Zimbabwe, Congo, Ivory Coast, Pakistan, Haiti, Algeria, Nigeria, Georgia, Sri Lanka, Ethiopia, Syria, Lebanon, United States, Afghanistan, Mexico, Columbia, Chechnya...

Thanks, but I like Canada the way it is.

You forgot to add Vancouver to that list Rockie. Last time I looked Vancouver was part of Canada.

[Rockie]

One only has to look at Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Zimbabwe, Congo, Ivory Coast, Pakistan, Haiti, Algeria, Nigeria, Georgia, Sri Lanka, Ethiopia, Syria, Lebanon, United States, Afghanistan, Mexico, Columbia, Chechnya...

Thanks, but I like Canada the way it is.

You forgot to add Vancouver to that list Rockie. Last time I looked Vancouver was part of Canada.

C'mon ., do you really think Vancouver belongs on that list? Be honest now.

[xsbank]

Show me some statistics that prove that the gun registry has improved things in Canada, since we had to register all handguns before anyway.

Show me the proof and I don't mean FEELINGS I mean proof, how have we benefitted from spending all that money and wasting all this useless natter? If you are right, it should be easy to prove. Fill your boots.


The so-called Montreal Massacre is a red herring and I am bored to death with it.

If you want to rant about something in Montreal, talk about the filthy, over-crowded third-world hospitals we have here. Way more than getting shot, I worry about having to check into a hospital here. Gee, do you think 2 billion might have made a difference here?

[Rockie]

Show me some statistics that prove that the gun registry has improved things in Canada, since we had to register all handguns before anyway.

Show me the proof and I don't mean FEELINGS I mean proof, how have we benefitted from spending all that money and wasting all this useless natter? If you are right, it should be easy to prove. Fill your boots.


The so-called Montreal Massacre is a red herring and I am bored to death with it.

If you want to rant about something in Montreal, talk about the filthy, over-crowded third-world hospitals we have here. Way more than getting shot, I worry about having to check into a hospital here. Gee, do you think 2 billion might have made a difference here?

Jeez. Show me proof that driving slower reduces your chance of being killed in a collision. Show me proof that TCAS reduces midairs. Show me proof that insulating my garage roof will make my house warmer. Show me proof that tying your shoes will keep you from falling flat on your face.

Some things you just have to accept as making sense.

[Dex]

Funny that you never hear complaints about registering handguns or the introduction of bills to scrap the handgun registry or how much the handgun registry costs or how the handgun registry doesn't prevent handgun crimes. Not a peep!

[Topspin]

I am all for the registry though for exactly the reasons you state Rockie. It, by itself , is not the solution, but it is a component that contributes to gun control.

I can't understand why most can't see that that the registry was designed to enforce responsibility and accountability for gun ownership.

How is the registry a component that contributes to gun control? I would really like to know.

I just cannot see it as anything more than a statistical record:

It does not prevent people from owning firearms. It does not prevent people from using firearms in an illegal fashion. It does not force accountability on owners, the regulations are not enforced anyway. It does not regulate who can own firearms.

I would really like to see how it "enforces responsibility and accountability for gun ownership." I am really open to other facts, and would happily change my view should something become visible.

But as it stands all I can see is an outrageous waste of resources that could be better utilized on anything from actual enforcement of firearms laws to health care.

[niss]

They knew some guns were missing from your dads shop....they killed him and your mom.



AVENGE ME!




Now how many of you registration supporters want this? HUH?!?!? Do you want those fucking commies coming in here and there isn't a God damn thing you can do because they knew exactly where to grab them?!?!!?

I will be fucked if I let you granola eating hippies pave the way for the soviets to come in here and take my country!


BETTER DEAD THAN RED!

[Dex]

Let's look at a theoretical example of the gun registry in action.

We have a firearms owner, call him John Smith. John has a couple of 30-30's in plastic cases in his closet with padlocks on them. This is technically legal for not restricted firearms, behind one secure barrier that is locked.
Now John has the unfortunate luck to have a break-in, his guns get stolen. He phones the cops in the morning and reports it, 99.99% of the time it ends there, John did not break the law. Let's extrapolate a bit though, next week one of the rifles turns up as a murder weapon. 99.99% of the time nothing will change at all. What is John going to be charged with? Accessory to murder? He followed the law to the letter.
So for a worst case scenario, CFC decides John shouldn't own guns anymore. They give him notice and ask him to turn in his firearms before X date or have them confiscated. John says, "Hey, I want to keep my guns." So he "sells" them to his range buddy John Doe, he doesn't even have to store them in John Does safe, because the laws are not enforced anyway.

Net change.........Nothing.

ROFLMAO!!!!! So, you get your guns taken away from the regulator and you want me to register your guns in my name for your use and to store at your place? At any rate your example shows that now John Doe is responsible for that "legal" firearm and the regulator has a record of this.

[xsbank]

double post sorry.

[Topspin]

ROFLMAO!!!!! So, you get your guns taken away from the regulator and you want me to register your guns in my name for your use and to store at your place? At any rate your example shows that now John Doe is responsible for that "legal" firearm and the regulator has a record of this.

It was a theoretical worst case example. Things would never ever be taken that far. But it just goes to show how weak the registry is.

[xsbank]

Rockie, your mind is closed tighter than a bull's ass in fly season.

Thank you for proving my point.

Your 'argument' is pure propaganda.

[Rockie]

Rockie, your mind is closed tighter than a bull's ass in fly season.

That's funny. Mind if I use it?

[mcrit]

Rockie wrote:
mcrit

Rabid describes the NRA and similar pro-gun people, not people who support gun control. How many threads on here (this one for instance) are started by gun control supporters compared to the pro-gun people? Go ahead and count them...I'll wait for an answer.

I'll grant that there are some pro-gun wing nuts, but all you need to do is puruse some anti-gun websites to find that there are equally rabid parites on that side of the fence. The key difference is that the media doesn't paint them in such an unflattering light.

Valid reasons for registering and licencing pets, restaurants, elevators, businesses? Well, it's hardly a complete list but here goes:

I only asked why we should have to register pets and businesses

2. Registering your pet helps return them to you if they go astray. They also allow a city to find the owners and hold them responsible when one misbehaves.

Yeah, this could be accomplished by just requiring a name/address tag. No need for a central registry.

3. Requiring a business licence attaches a name to that business so the authorities know who to speak to when they break the law or steal stuff from you. Again this is for your protection as you'll notice that none of the internet scams for example are legitimate businesses.

They could also just walk up to the building where that bussiness is and have a word with them. Again, no need to get permission to make a livelyhood.