Long Gun Registry

Hey fatty, that’s a great list. A lot of people died because they didn’t have a gun. Except, 56 million seems a little low. I’m sure everyday someone is confronted by someone with a gun and then killed because they didn’t have one themselves. It’s a cold world out there. You better pack your own heat, right?

But what abbout people who died because of ballistic weapons control. I mean, I went down to the weapons… er, I mean ‘Sporting Goods’ store the other day and asked to purchase a missile. I was told they didn’t sell missles at the store, so I was like “Gid darn it. Why can I not get me a proper missile in 'dis town, Huh? Just like everything else, if ya want something in little old PR you gots to order it in.” I was asked to immediatley to leave that store. Whatever.

So, I emailed Lockheed Martin and asked, nay, demanded that they sell me a missile. You know what they said to me?

“Dear Mr Huh? We appreciate your interest in our Scorpion missile brand, but we are, unfortunatley, not able to sell to individuals at this time. Thank you for your support, and remember ‘We never forget who we are working for’.”

I told them I had the money, seeing as how I am economically dependent on the Welfare, and had lots of time to set up the parts, if it was needed. They still said no. I get better service at the Casi-oh-no.

So, as it turns out, the state has missile control, or so I am told. What a great amount of control they have, too. Get this, 45 afghan civilians – women, and children included – were killed by a NATO missile just last month. Oops. Our bad. But it wasn’t, was it. It was the state’s bad. But think, if every one of those people had guns, they would have at least died with the honour of holding a gun. It would have been a natural death. Same thing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki all those years ago. It just goes to show, if people had guns – or better yet, ballistic weapons – then the government couldn’t push us around and then we would run things. Yeah. I like the sound of that. As a former successful businessman, I can buy into that.

In the end I’m still alive – for now. No telling when those government crazies will come for me. Vote Huh? in the next federal election.

Ok, so it’s NOT about sports and hunting, but it’s about stopping genocide? We need unregistered assault rifles to stop genocide? ok, thanks.

this is far too easy,
hang on a minute while I change the bait

Wahhh! Marc Lepine! Waah! Poster boy for all eternity. Proof that all men are misogynists all guns kill people.
So you found three over the course of 25 years. Kind of proved my point for me. Now tell us how a registry could’ve possibly prevented any of the three…

mwf.mb.ca/mwf/pdfs/rebut.pdf

         I'm back with new bait , cmon out all you formerly succesful ideologically stubborn businessmen, not that I expect we can change your mind or opinion but its gonna be interesting to see what your rebuttal to proffesor Mauser's position is. Of course, for those who have already decided what they believe, facts are not interesting
                      no I'm not registering my coffee! and you'll get my donut when you pry it from my cold dead hands.

How about a swimming pool registry, you nanny stater’s. Licence swimmers and grant the police special powers to inspect their chlorine stash.
54 deaths due to drowning in Ontario since the first of May this year , yep better get someone on that right away. Of course us red neck not formerly succesful types will counter with swimming pools dont kill people, but you morally superior lieberal types will legislate us straight though .

I’m still confused – how does having an unregistered swimming pool help us counter genocide, world government, and bad immigration policy? Isn’t the debate about the government wanting to register guns so they can take them away from us and then repress and kill us?

Don’t tell me you haven’t noticed the black helicopters around rupert lately.

I liked the big panic over 2 tons of missing explosives a few months back. Two lines in, it’s fertilizer!!!
Everyone in Saskatchewan is under suspicion as a terrorist! Art Knapp’s is an Al Qaeda front!

Sorry it took so long to respond. I was busy organizing a “A Pool? Not In My Backyard” rally for Etobicoke. Thanks for that info from Ontario. I was unaware that pools were killing people all over the central kingdom. Us APNIMBYs are fed up with the surge of out of control aqautic violence swelling across the country. But we are going to do something about it. Thanks fatty, this will be a central part of the WTF Party’s election campaign.

Speaking of insanity, Ms Cukier sure is wilder than a bowl of oates.

Also crazy, I agree with Mauser’s stats that the registry has direclty increased gang related homicides. That’s what makes statistics so fun. They can literally mean whatever you want them to mean.

Back to topic, that Long Gun registry sure does piss people off, eh? I like that. Anger is sweet. Would be sweeter with a gun… a looooooooooong gun. Only fer hunting wild beasts.

Hmmmmmmmmm… welp, I’d like to think, but I’m about to smoke a liberale and then go save another child from one of those murderous pools. APNIMBY! APNIMBY!

I have always been scared of pools, No way i want one of those in my backyard. Pools kill people. The only good pool is an empty pool!

[quote=“herbie_popnecker”]Wahhh! Marc Lepine! Waah! Poster boy for all eternity. Proof that all men are misogynists all guns kill people.
So you found three over the course of 25 years. Kind of proved my point for me. Now tell us how a registry could’ve possibly prevented any of the three…[/quote]

I take it that you’re responding to my post. Actually I didn’t bring up Marc Lepine (who murdered 14 people) … but you also seem to be confusing him with Denis Lortie (who murdered 3). That aside your main argument seems to be the following:

[quote=“herbie_popnecker”]
… There is no need for the gov’t to know who owns which long gun. None. Zero… How many ‘crimes’ were committed with a rifle? Eliminate the ones that were for registry offences and what’s left makes the case. [/quote]

How many crimes are committed with a rifle? Fair question. Your ‘case’ as you call it seems to be that other than registry offences no crimes are committed. I don’t know how many crimes are committed with long guns … let’s just talk about murders. There are reports that in this country 88% of women who are murdered with firearms are killed with long guns. The stats are quite different in the States … only 23% of women murdered with firearms are killed with long guns … not surprising in view of the availability of handguns down there.

Perhaps you have some counter-evidence to offer. So much Harperite thinking seems to be based on belief or faith rather than stats or other information.

As for your other point …

I don’t know if a registry would have prevented the murders committed by Marc Lepine in Montreal … I’m not a criminologist or a pro-registry activist. But I do know of one murder where I think that the registry could have made a difference … and perhaps others are similar.

It involved a friend of mine … she was shot pretty much at point blank range by an ex-boyfriend … with a long gun … a hunting rifle. There had been previous incidents … ‘domestic disputes’ … which leads to my point and where I think that you haven’t quite thought things through …

If the registry had existed back then … and the police had a record of his long gun … they might have required … as a condition for him being released on his own recognizance after those previous incidents … that he turn it in. Perhaps there would have been another showdown or ugly incident, but not a killing.

Anyway, that’s my view … I doubt that you will be swayed.

[quote=“herbie_popnecker”]I liked the big panic over 2 tons of missing explosives a few months back. Two lines in, it’s fertilizer!!!
Everyone in Saskatchewan is under suspicion as a terrorist! Art Knapp’s is an Al Qaeda front![/quote]

I missed that story … but fertilizer (ammonium nitrate) mixed with fuel oil (ANFO) is an explosive … deisel will do … Timothy McVey used an upgraded version at Oklahoma City … it’s also been used by the IRA, ETA and others to make IEDs … missing fertilizer is cause for concern.

Sorry to hear about your friend. It’s hard to tell, but if you’re saying there were previous incidents of domestic disputes using a firearm, then yes they would have released him on conditions to turn in his firearms. If they were domestic disputes that didn’t involve firearms, it’s highly unlikely that he would have been released with firearm conditions. You might think that in all cases when someone is charged/arrested in a domestic, they run the person through the registry to see if he/she owns firearms. In my experience, here in Prince Rupert, this is not the case. In all my years at the courthouse I can tell you that very few people get released with firearm conditions when charged with non firearm related offences. Even spousal’s. And it’s not because the Judges won’t do it. The prosecutors never ask.

From my point of view, it’s simple economics. Does what we pay now to keep the registry running, provide a tangible benefit to law enforcement? When asked, most people will default to the opinion of keeping the registry simply because they are ignorant of what it actually does, and they don’t want to risk the consequences.

Good Lord don’t confuse me with a Harperite! The issue is not branded to one political party, it is a civil rights issue and about the one single civil rights issue Harper is not on the wrong side of.
I’ve already stated (I think) that I have absolutely no problem requiring someone to obtain training and be screened for an FAC before they can legally own any gun. I have no problem if they want to ride handgun owners clean into the ground altogether as those are specifically designed to use against people, near useless for anything else. I don’t even own any guns now living in town, I don’t particularly enjoy hunting, but should I move back rural and want a 22 to keep the foxes out of my henhouse, that’s none of the gov’ts business. I already have the FAC. I have also said that I haven’t a problem trading off a vote on this issue (which really is minor considering the shit that needs to be dealt with and never is) for something of greater importance, as Cullen did once before.

And if you want to argue statistics, then LOOK at what you’ve produced! Three serious incidents in 25 years, an anecdote that in no way backs your position on the registry and a quote that 88% of women killed with guns are killed with long guns. Let’s look at that one, because I would bet it’s damned accurate, seeing as how I’ve met less than one in twenty gun owners that even have a handgun. That same statistic says to me that there’s twice the reason to crack down on handgun ownership.
Just like the statistics the Police Chiefs are flogging. Of course if all you need to do is add a line of code and a computer check will indicate if the house your attending may have a weapon present, the database is going to be accessed more often! But to point it out to show it IS accessed more often and therefore necessary assumes your talking to an idiot. Just like pointing to the proliferation of illegal smuggled weapons in the hands of gangs has anything at all to do with registering some farmers varmint gun.
Now if you still truly believe that the gov’t knowing what rifle each person owns is somehow going to make you feel more secure, you are welcome to your position. Mine remains that the general public should not be inconvenienced because a psychotic pussy intent on murder and not caring if he’s caught or killed is not going to be deterred by it.
Else what?
He killed his wife with a registered weapon, therefore it must be a crime of passion.
He killed his wife with an unregistered weapon, therefore it must be premeditated murder.

[quote=“CrazyMike”]

… You might think that in all cases when someone is charged/arrested in a domestic, they run the person through the registry to see if he/she owns firearms. In my experience, here in Prince Rupert, this is not the case. In all my years at the courthouse I can tell you that very few people get released with firearm conditions when charged with non firearm related offences. Even spousal’s. And it’s not because the Judges won’t do it. The prosecutors never ask.

From my point of view, it’s simple economics. Does what we pay now to keep the registry running, provide a tangible benefit to law enforcement? When asked, most people will default to the opinion of keeping the registry simply because they are ignorant of what it actually does, and they don’t want to risk the consequences.[/quote]

An interesting and thoughtful comment on a controversial topic … I was thinking about conditions of release on a recognizance before a police officer rather than before a judge, both being relevant. My understanding as a lay person is that under the Criminal Code a police officer can require … under sections 499 or 503 … that a person released under a recognizance give various undertakings including:

“(e) to abstain from possessing a firearm and to surrender any firearm in the possession of the person and any authorization, licence or registration certificate or other document enabling that person to acquire or possess a firearm;”

A judge has separate authority to set conditions for release … I see that there is detailed language in section 515 about firearms. I don’t know if the police handle these situations the same as a prosecutor … since the accused or the prosecutor can ask a judge to vary the conditions set by the police I would not be surprised if they err on the side of protecting public safety.

Either way … it seems to me that it is easier for the police to enforce firearms undertakings … and hopefully reduce the frequency of tragedies involving long guns … if they have a record … even one that may be less than perfect … of what firearms the person has registered. Otherwise, they’re having to take the released person’s word for it … hardly the preferred option I would think … or get a search warrant, which may not be feasible.

As for the cost of maintaining the registry, it’s probably best to know what that cost is before weighing the cost/benefits of the registry. According to the CBC’s reading of the RCMP report … which the government has yet to release, citing the need to wait until it is translated … although very costly to set up the long gun registry doesn’t cost much to maintain, keeping in mind that in any event the government has to maintain a registry for pistols, collectors pieces etc.

some interesting quotes as to costs broken down in this article in the Windsor Star.

Gunning for the cash
By Chris Vander Doelen, The Windsor Star August 28, 2010 Just as they did with the census debate two weeks ago, the Opposition and their allies are whipping themselves into a righteous froth over preserving the long-gun registry.

It doesn’t seem to be working any more than their census fight did. And that’s despite the “big guns” being rolled out this week – the Association of Chiefs of Police, who would have you believe they speak directly with God.

Ignore what the police chiefs say about the gun registry.

As public employees they should be keeping their political opinions to themselves, and not taking sides in a partisan campaign or attempting to further pad their already huge budgets.

“Since when do the police make government policy?” wonders Garry Breitkreuz, a Conservative MP from Yorkton, Sask., and an expert on Canadian gun control. “They can advise us on policy, nothing more.”

Public opinion is running strongly against the long-gun registry anyway, according to an Angus Reid poll released this week. It shows 72 per cent of Canadians think it is a huge waste of money that does nothing to prevent crime.

The chiefs group claims its members unanimously support the registry, which is demonstrably false, Breitkreuz told me by phone Friday. “Nine of the 12 chiefs here in Saskatchewan have told me they don’t support it.”

A whopping 92 per cent of rank-and-file police officers think the registry should be scrapped, he said.

It’s the census fight all over again: Bureaucrats, leftists, academics and professional do-gooders all one side of the issue, normal people on the other.

Here’s something the gun registry zealots would hate: Do the math and it appears the cost to taxpayers of each gun check performed in Canada is at least $15,284.78.

The annual cost of the registry was a minimum of $106 million per year in 2003, according to the Library of Parliament research department, cited by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

Since gun registry records show police run an average of only 19 gun checks per day, coast to coast, that works out to $15 Gs each.

Police officials claim the registry costs only $4.1 million per year to operate, but that’s a ridiculous claim. If that were true the 250 employees who work at the registry centre in Miramichi, N.B., earn an average of $16,400 each annually. Federal employees at that wage? Fat chance.

Of course, Canadian police claim they run 11,000 gun checks per day in their relentless pursuit of keeping the peace.

Candace Hoeppner, the Conservative MP from Manitoba who sponsored the private member’s bill to kill the registry, says the vast majority of the 11,000 daily registry checks are for names and addresses only.

“The vast majority were due to hits automatically generated by a system designed to produce impressive statistics from irrelevant inquiries,” Hoeppner says on her website, scraptheregistry.ca.

But let’s say for the sake of argument the cost for 11,000 queries per day is only $26 per pop, so to speak.

Virtually all of those checks are run on law-abiding people who don’t own any guns, or who register the ones they have.

The rest of the checks are run on criminals who don’t register their guns, so they never get flagged.

Still, the police industry collects a $26 tax per query. Every traffic stop is another cha-ching for the registry racket.

“Police chief bureaucrats defend the registry because it gives them an excuse to purchase more computers, hire more staff and get larger budgets,” Kevin Gaudet, federal director of the CTF, said this week.

Critics of the gun registry often point to its $2-billion cumulative cost over the past 14 years. I’ve never heard anyone question why it continues to cost $106 million per year, or who profits.

Gaudet says the $106 million is the most conservative figure available, unadjusted for inflation.

The worst-case estimate prepared for Parliament seven years ago put the potential cost of the registry at $982 million per year for all three levels of government.

That would go a long way to explain why the chiefs are so determined to preserve an agency that doesn’t appear to perform any useful function. (As Hoeppner says, the gun registry has never prevented a single deadly crime).

Like most things that purport to be about principle, the gun registry is mostly about the money. It’s just another petty racket being run against taxpayers, this time by police administrators.

The long-gun registry should be filed in the same bin as the one containing the cancelled long-form census. The one entitled, Too Much Government, Costing Too Much.

cvanderdoelen@thestar.canwest.com or 519-255-6852 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 519-255-6852 end_of_the_skype_highlighting

© Copyright © The Windsor Star

[quote=“toofattofly”]some interesting quotes as to costs broken down in this article in the Windsor Star.

The annual cost of the registry was a minimum of $106 million per year in 2003, according to the Library of Parliament research department, cited by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

Critics of the gun registry often point to its $2-billion cumulative cost over the past 14 years. I’ve never heard anyone question why it continues to cost $106 million per year, or who profits.

Gaudet says the $106 million is the most conservative figure available, unadjusted for inflation.

The worst-case estimate prepared for Parliament seven years ago put the potential cost of the registry at $982 million per year for all three levels of government. …

[/quote]

That’s interesting and there are some numbers scattered through the polemics … but I don’t understand why the discussion is caught in a time warp, seemingly stuck at 2003 … “a minimum cost of $106 million per year in 2003” … “why it continues to cost $106 million per year” … “$106 million is the most conservative figure available” … “worst-case estimate prepared for Parliament seven years ago”.

The most recent estimate that I could find was prepared by Treasury Board … its “2010-11 Main Estimates” for the RCMP, who run the firearms centre, cites a budget for “Firearms Registration” (not just long guns registration) of $22,315,000 … less than half of what has been budgeted for firearms registration, which I don’t think anyone is saying should be scrapped.

Here’s the link to the source: tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/201020 … g.asp#bm07

Hopefully the RCMP’s recent report … which comments on costs … will be released to the public by the government.

“The registering of hunting rifles is the first step in the social re-engineering of Canadians”

  • Liberal Senator Sharon Carstairs

“I came to Ottawa last year, with the firm belief that the only people in Canada who should have firearms are police officers and the military.”

  • former Justice Minister Alan Rock and chief architect of the Long Gun Registry

“…disarming the Canadian public is part of the new humanitarian social agenda.”

  • Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axeworthy at a Gun Control conference in Oslo, Norway in 1998.

Sgt. Alan Rock and Queasy Company?

holy crap batdung the RCMP report that was just released said the registry only costs $4 million a year to operate now and is used constantly by police not 19 times, and lets face it if all guns are registered you take an avenue away from criminals, there was a documentary about 8 yrs ago on ABC about gun control when DC had it and the neighbouring state didn’t , ppl would go buy guns, rifles etc, and then they were video taped going around the building reselling the weapons to criminals or ppl that couldn’t buy a weapon, so guess what that avenue is blocked in Canada by the registration, try to explain how a registered long gun or hand gun is found at a crime scene when it is traced back to the owner that probably sold it to someone that could not obtain it, hell I wouldn’t care if they required finger prints on all government documents , I have nothing to hide.

For the most part, long guns ( rifles/shotguns) are not used in crimes. Hand Guns or automatic guns, which are considered restricted and/or prohibited, are used. Especially when used by organized crime/gangs. Are long guns used in crime and domestic violence, sure the are. Occasionally. Will registering them help? Probably not. Is the registry used by police? Of course it is. I’m sure before they execute any warrant or enter any premises they check it. But how reliable is it? Think about it. If you were a criminal, would you register your gun? If you had a criminal record, you wouldn’t be allowed to own a gun, therefore no registering. I’m not apposed to long gun registry, as long as it’s cost effective. What I would rather see is tougher penalties for the use of guns (of any type) in crimes. Min of 10 years in jail for the firearm, + the penalty for whatever the crime was might get people thinking. Or 10 years and deport if you are not a Canadian citizen.