akhmel

Um....no. You see, we're talking about the gun registry, which was passed in 1995. In 1995, 588 homicides vs 605 now. I am not saying the gun registry is causing it to grow, it is just useless.

In the past 5 years, they are. Here While overall violent crime is down, homicides are up: Link

The one before the registry was good enough. First, as far as what I'm hearing from gun owners, it isn't as simple as you think. And if is was, I still don't see how would a person who registers his weapon not be capable of shooting someone. Aren't people obliged to register their guns? And even if a gun goes to the wrong hand, how does the gun registry make any difference? You have two scenarios: one, no gun registry, a gun is stolen and used in a crime. The second, we have a gun registry, a gun is stolen and used in a crime. What is the difference? None, except that in the second scenario, if the guy didn't know the gun was stolen, he may go to jail for that crime. There is something in common however: the crime won't be prevented. Once again, homicides are increasing. Here is a possible solution. The majority of shootings are gang related. What are they mostly interested in? Drugs. Don't you think if we legalized it, there'd be less gangs and hence less shootings?

I think the one they had before the gun registry was good enough (training, background checks, etc) I think everyone knows the answer to this question. According to this, you'd be wrong. You can make an access to information request to Correctional Service. One prison is about $25 million. I strongly doubt a lot of people commit this crime, or at least, get caught. I agree with you on this one. What does the gun registry have to do with illegal guns? Change the name Harper to any politician and that would fit too. All politicians do it like that.

Well, if that is the case, then social problems should be solved in this country, rather than worrying about guns. Australia: Link England:Link If you say one could argue that there would have been a greater number, go ahead then. It would be very interesting to see how one can show it. Is it increasing because of increased gang activity or just speculation? I don't have to prove that it doesn't work, you have to prove it does.

Well, please show data that the gun registry is working. Just because it could have worked isn't good enough. The only "right policies" you've suggested are that the police should pay close attention to the people who buy a lot of guns, when it hasn't been proven that homicides are involved with people who buy a lot of guns. If there's more, please tell me what other policies should be implemented. Swtizerland and a city in Georgia have mandatory gun possession and they have very rare violent crimes. When UK and Australia had their gun ban, overall crime went WAY up. And I must say once again, ever since the gun registry was implemented in this country, we've seen an INCREASE in shootings. It isn't that we don't believe, facts show they don't work.

Duh! A time machine should be implemented in the gun registry! That darn Harper for not using technology!

I don't get it. How does buying more powerful weapons make one a potential killer? Did you do some research on the subject? Are you saying that the majority of the killers have a lot of weapons? If so, prove it. And have you ever heard of gun collection? I don't agree that more jail time is the answer, but gun guntrol is definetly not either. Why is it that countries that have lax gun laws have lower crimes than countries that have strict gun laws? Also, after the gun registry has been implemented, the murder rate has increased. So, how is it working? So, you're supporting a registry that is killing more people. And as far as your examples are concerned (Dawson, Montreal shooting), this just proves even more that the gun registry doesn't work. Thanks!