One more time Gun Registry

[Handsome Rob]

I've said it before, the gun registry was never intended to be more than a placebo to placate Canadians screaming about gun violence - in lieu of actually doing something about it. Did they think it was going to cost nearly $2 billion? No.

But it isn't even a placebo.

Not only is it a failed idea, it's a failed institution. Plainly evidenced by the number of registered glue guns, firearms stored in different residences to the actual owners, etc. Beyond possession of an unregistered firearm, their is zero enforcement for compliance, and the probability of a non-lawbreaker ever facing that for an unregistered firearm is pretty much zero.. Modified firearms, place of residence, registration class.

I mean, they could have done something constructive like legislate laws that actually require owners of non-restricted weapons to have a safe. Restrictions on the movement of ammunition which is much more difficult to smuggle than firearms.

Canada's firearms laws are a joke, but somehow we're supposed to believe the registry keeps us safe?

Edited April 20, 2010 by Handsome Rob

[Pliny]

yes, we've heard this from you before... by the way, would you classify the, "most police forces" and "most municipal governments" you refer to as being urban, or rural based? Other than an occasional quote reference appearing on an anti-gun registry source, I'm not aware of any significant survey/polling done of policeman on local, provincial or federal levels... if you have any citations to support your assertion that, "most actual police officers could care less about the gun registry", it would be helpful to receive them.

particularly in the face of suggested improvements (those just outlined by Ignatieff) what would be your remaining concern(s) with the gun registry?

The Association of Chiefs of Police is funded by the Federal Government I would expect it to cleave to government policy or it may find it's budget cut.

I don't think you will find it helpful to receive any citations. You have never demonstrated that in the past. Your specious tone betrays you.

[waldo]

Here's One

oh really... from the Garry Breitkreuz website no less... apparently, he felt no need to offer substantiating detail to support his claims that, "Every poll ever taken of front-line police officers shows opposition ranges between 75% and 100%."

[waldo]

of course... the gun registry is supported by the Canadian Police Association, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, and the Canadian Association of Police Boards. Apparently value add! In 2009, the gun registry was consulted by police 11,000 times per day.

The Association of Chiefs of Police is funded by the Federal Government I would expect it to cleave to government policy or it may find it's budget cut.

I don't think you will find it helpful to receive any citations. You have never demonstrated that in the past. Your specious tone betrays you.

a little morning trolling, hey Pliny?

I mentioned 3 associations... even if one were to accept your unsubstantiated claim that one of those associations receives federal funding, are you suggesting that the Harper Conservative government continues to fund that association... because it supports the gun registry? Is that your claim, Pliny?

[M.Dancer]

I thought the 11,000 uses of the registry sounded a little dubious....

Police departments frequently use the Canadian Firearms Registry data base to allow police officers to check if a residence or property might contain a registered firearm before responding to a call. The gun registry has received support from the Canadian Association of Police Chiefs. Chief Jack Ewatski, president of the CACP, and Chief Armand LaBarge, president of the Ontario Association of Police Chiefs, stated that police officers across the country search the registry about 18 times per day. (Instead of the misled 9,400 a day where any personal information search is count as a hit) However, most of those 5,000 queries are generated automatically when other queries are submitted to the CPIC system such as during routine traffic stops. In actual fact, as the Auditor General found, there is no reliable information to suggest how many times per day police officers intentionally access the firearms registry.[citation needed]

The Canadian Firearms Centre says police make more than 13,000 queries to the system each week.[9]

In a Canada Firearms Centre (CAFC) survey, 92% of general duty police officers stated that they use the system.[10]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Firearms_Registry#Use_of_the_registry

[Muddy]

Well the registration has been in effect for quite some time ,yet the Gang Bangers are still shooting it up in the Big Smoke. Why? Could it be the registration targeted the wrong owners of firearms? 2 billion for what? I lived in camps where every one was armed ,yet no one ever got shot.Why is that? Could it be because we were the good guys?

I do not own a gun or rifle but I know a law that does nothing to prevent crime or protect us from bad guys.

[waldo]

The registry is very costly. It was originally supposed to cost 128 million and ran into the billions.

the gun registry was costly to implement; relatively speaking, it is not costly to operate. Other past MLW threads have beaten on the history and reasons for the implementation cost - there are no shortage of contributors to that implementation cost, inclusive of government bungling as well as tactics deployed by those against the gun registry.

Although one lives his life comfortably in a democracy of relative stability with minimal threats to person and property and the apparency of security the scene is never static. Quick acquisition may be necessary.

ahhh, the urban survivalist! Pliny, just get it over with - right now... don't hesitate, don't wait on your worst nightmares! Just go get that gun - right now! Hee haw!

The long gun registry is a particular sore point because rural citizens often find they need protection from wildlife and the constraints of regulation are far too stringent.

but they don't seem to have any difficulty and problem in registering their pick-me-ups, hey Pliny? Besides, Ignatieff has just advised on solutions to help remedy the rural concern... Pliny, in your speaking for rural citizens, do you feel those proposed adjustments to the gun registry will suffice, and if not, why not?

[Wild Bill]

I mean, they could have done something constructive like legislate laws that actually require owners of non-restricted weapons to have a safe. Restrictions on the movement of ammunition which is much more difficult to smuggle than firearms.

Canada's firearms laws are a joke, but somehow we're supposed to believe the registry keeps us safe?

It was always a political solution. There was some scandal in Toronto a couple of years ago about ammunition. It seemed that criminals would buy some ammunition, knowing that they would have to sign into an address book. This gave them the opportunity to read the addresses of legitimate ammunition buyers, that they could later rob with a quick B & E!

I would have had at least a shred of respect for the Liberal gun registry if it had have added at least ONE DAY to the minimum sentence for USING a gun unlawfully! Read it for yourself. It doesn't.

In fact, one criticism of its initial draft was that the penalty for not registering was proposed to be greater than the typical sentence for using a gun to rob a variety store, which was less than one year. The illegal use of a firearm does not add any mandatory time to a criminal's sentence. It may look like its adding time but the firearm charge is always either plea bargained away or simply served concurrently, meaning at the same time as the robbery charge so that there is no EXTRA time!

How anyone can make the claim that the Liberals wanted to make us safer when their registry did NOTHING to criminals is beyond me! Obviously, it was simply politics, for a cheap vote grab.

[waldo]

Toronto Police Chief William Blair, president of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police - We lose the gun registry at our peril:

We believe that the gun registry provides police services across this country with the information they need, first of all to help us keep communities safe, and also to keep police officers safe," Blair said. "We lose it at our peril.

We operate in a wide range of environments where long guns are the major problem. We need the tools for preventive action. We are actively combatting the illegal gun trade and cross-border smuggling. Illegal guns begin as legal guns. Without strong controls on legal firearms, we cannot prevent diversion to illegal markets. Without information about who owns firearms legally, and the firearms they own, we cannot charge individuals with illegal possession. We need strong laws controlling firearms

There is no question the system is a valuable tool. We have problems with rifles and shotguns as well as handguns. We need rigorous controls for both. Gun theft is a significant problem. We need to ensure owners are accountable for their firearms. Every gun tells a story and the registration system often gives us a starting point in our investigations.

[M.Dancer]

You have to wonder about the utility of the Long gun registry, given that the duplication of the FAC must be near 100%...why the FAC couldn't be used in the same manner, at a fraction of the cost.

[eyeball]

what should his motivations be to not support it?

He lived in the US long enough to see how stupid it is to not control guns.

[eyeball]

I could care less what he does he shouldn't whip a private members vote.

True. Controlling democracy is even more dangerous than not controlling guns.

[Wild Bill]

Toronto Police Chief William Blair, president of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police - We lose the gun registry at our peril:

Give it a rest! Could you possibly come up with any more biased sources?

Police chiefs are political animals. At least, they are if they want to get and keep their jobs. However, they don't have to give a damn if the gun registry is cost-effective. From their POV, if it is even a fraction better than nothing it is to their advantage to keep it.

A police chief would prefer to have ten times as many laws and registries available to him, so that he can always use SOMETHING against a criminal! Anyone who might complain about civil liberties is always told "Rest assured, we would only use such a law against BAD guys! Trust us!".

Julian Fantino taught us that, at Caledonia.

It's obvious you're just a troll but even you can surely do better than this! You respond only with cites about police chiefs supporting a useless registry. You haven't said one word about how it actually works! Or doesn't work, to be more accurate. Someone points out that the gun registry doesn't actually keep a criminal off the street for a longer time and you trumpet back "So what? 3 out of 5 police chiefs LIKE it!"

Are you feeling rundown lately? You're not even being good theatre with this one.

Edited April 20, 2010 by Wild Bill

[Handsome Rob]

He lived in the US long enough to see how stupid it is to not control guns.

What does the gun registry have to do with gun control?

[eyeball]

What does the gun registry have to do with gun control?

Nowhere near enough.

[M.Dancer]

The long gun registry is to gun control in the same manner as shoes are to the game of chess.

[waldo]

Toronto Police Chief William Blair, president of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police - We lose the gun registry at our peril:

We believe that the gun registry provides police services across this country with the information they need, first of all to help us keep communities safe, and also to keep police officers safe," Blair said. "We lose it at our peril.

We operate in a wide range of environments where long guns are the major problem. We need the tools for preventive action. We are actively combatting the illegal gun trade and cross-border smuggling. Illegal guns begin as legal guns. Without strong controls on legal firearms, we cannot prevent diversion to illegal markets. Without information about who owns firearms legally, and the firearms they own, we cannot charge individuals with illegal possession. We need strong laws controlling firearms

There is no question the system is a valuable tool. We have problems with rifles and shotguns as well as handguns. We need rigorous controls for both. Gun theft is a significant problem. We need to ensure owners are accountable for their firearms. Every gun tells a story and the registration system often gives us a starting point in our investigations.

Give it a rest! Could you possibly come up with any more biased sources?

Police chiefs are political animals. At least, they are if they want to get and keep their jobs. However, they don't have to give a damn if the gun registry is cost-effective. From their POV, if it is even a fraction better than nothing it is to their advantage to keep it.

A police chief would prefer to have ten times as many laws and registries available to him, so that he can always use SOMETHING against a criminal! Anyone who might complain about civil liberties is always told "Rest assured, we would only use such a law against BAD guys! Trust us!".

Julian Fantino taught us that, at Caledonia.

It's obvious you're just a troll but even you can surely do better than this! You respond only with cites about police chiefs supporting a useless registry. You haven't said one word about how it actually works! Or doesn't work, to be more accurate. Someone points out that the gun registry doesn't actually keep a criminal off the street for a longer time and you trumpet back "So what? 3 out of 5 police chiefs LIKE it!"

Are you feeling rundown lately? You're not even being good theatre with this one.

It’s certainly unfortunate that you consider trolling the linking to a Globe article and quoting from its sources. It’s also unclear why you consider the sources biased, separate from their obvious direct job involvements and responsibilities… perhaps you could elaborate on your suggestion that police chiefs are, as you say, “politicized” in favour of their own gainful employment over and above their own described concerns for preventive action measures to help in their policing.

your inference that dismantling the gun registry in favour of civil liberties is certainly a new twist, not one I’ve heard emanating from your fellow posturing ‘get tough on crowd’ Conservative crew.

as for how the registry works… how it’s utilized… I expect you should backtrack and read the quotes I offered from the police chiefs and RCMP commissioner themselves. It appears in your dismissive haste, you must have missed their comments.

in regards your interest/concern for my health, save your interest/concern. In terms of your entertainment value, I’m actually not particularly focused on that… although… I’m sure I could find some angle to allow you to inject your incessant need to highlight your presumed working-stiff technical prowess… hey now, was that comment… the good theatre you were missing… or my attempt to legitimize your earlier misplaced trolling assignment?

[M.Dancer]

If we are going to quote the Chiefs...

Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Julian Fantino is opposed to the gun registry, stating in a press release:

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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Firearms_Registry

[Wild Bill]

in regards your interest/concern for my health, save your interest/concern. In terms of your entertainment value, I’m actually not particularly focused on that… although… I’m sure I could find some angle to allow you to inject your incessant need to highlight your presumed working-stiff technical prowess… hey now, was that comment… the good theatre you were missing… or my attempt to legitimize your earlier misplaced trolling assignment?

A boring bunch of ad hominems dressed up with $10 words is still just as boring. All sizzle, no steak.

I'm going back to sleep.

Sorry if I woke you up. It was obvious you were still sleepy...

[Moonlight Graham]

Can somebody please step on the gun registry's neck and shoot it in the face? It just isn't worth the cost or effort.

[eyeball]

If we are going to quote the Chiefs...

Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Julian Fantino is opposed to the gun registry

Yes it's quite clear he is opposed to preventing crime.

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.

As for the arguments that the gun registry represents some sort of economic boondoggle. Ontario apparently spends some 60% of it's police budget combating pot and Fantino is a big fan of wasting even more money on this.

[M.Dancer]

Ontario apparently spends some 60% of it's police budget combating pot and Fantino is a big fan of wasting even more money on this.

I'm sure a citation will be forth coming..

[eyeball]

I should have said anti-drug budget.

Investigating and shutting down marijuana grow-ops make up 60 per cent of the workload of the force's drug enforcement unit, said OPP Insp. Brian Martin.

Story

Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino likened decriminalizing marijuana to legalizing murder yesterday as he rejected arguments that legal pot would cut down on organized crime operations now growing it. "I guess we can legalize murder too and then we won't have a murder case. We can't go that way," Fantino said.

Link

Given the long long term link between guns, crime, prohibition and wasting public money I'd say the gun registry is just a minor boondoggle in the scheme of things. Who really cares what the cops think anymore, like the Conservatives they're obviously completely out to lunch on the question of effectively using public funds to combat crime. I think they're actually in the business of creating crime so they can have a never ending galvanizing event with which to inspire fear and loathing amongst the electorate. All the better to campaign on a platform of cracking down and getting tough.

[eyeball]

I think they're actually in the business of creating crime so they can have a never ending galvanizing event with which to inspire fear and loathing amongst the electorate. All the better to campaign on a platform of cracking down and getting tough.

Apparently it's working.

Canadian outlook on crime hardening, poll suggests

Story

It's not the police state we're destined for it's the journey.

[bloodyminded]

Apparently it's working.

Story

It's not the police state we're destined for it's the journey.

As society atomizes and fractures, people tend to lose faith in human beings, perceiving everything as competition and potential confrontation...and so begin looking for something to blame.

Immigration and crime are two perennial favourites.