Gun Control

[pinko]

Fair enough. I haven't looked seriously into the matter, and as Dre pointed out, the results could be part of the investigative process, rather than a "smoking gun" moment (pun intended). So I admit I hadn't considered that too deeply.

Yes, I watched this on the news not an hour ago.

OK, and to be fair, I don't have much use for the "Big Government trying to take your guns!" conspiracies that are both stated outright or, more often, implied.

It's especially an issue, arguably, for the NDP, who have large numbers of supporters in both camps of this issue.

As you may know the NDP is currently in power in Manitoba. As I understand it the provincial government is opposed to the long gun registry per se but has a fairly comprehensive program aimed at getting a handle on this difficult problem.

Edited July 14, 2011 by pinko

[Bob]

Its used thousands of times a day... apparently someone finds it usefull. And it doesnt seem that hard to enforce registration of new guns at least.

The only argument advanced in this thread in support of gun registration is an alleged ability to use such a system for the purpose of criminal investigation. Please explain how such a system is used thousands of times per day towards those ends. Without thousands of crimes being committed with guns on a daily basis, WITH police knowledge of the registration number of the guns, WITH legal registration of the firearm being examined, there is absolutely no way it is purposefully used thousands of times per day.

[Bob]

The breakdown I read said that only some of the lookups are automatically triggered. And the system DOES do something. It collects information that links guns to their legal owners. I have no problem at all seeing a few ways that can be usefull, and now that the system is built its pretty cheap to collect it.

Which system has been built? If you're referring to the billion-plus dollar scandal, it was STILL incomplete by the time of its suspension, and not even close to completion.

Id give it a few more years, and then do a real study into how its used before I cancelled the program.

In other words, let's just build programs and examine them after-the-fact, rather than use critical things to make reasonable predictions about the utility of proposed programs. This is the absolute height of stupidity with respect to public policy, although this does seem to be the norm.

[Bob]

However I can't for the life of me understand why anyone with no criminal intent would object to registration and that includes long guns.

That is YOUR red herring. YOU intentionally misrepresented opposition to this wasteful program as being the result of criminal elements not wishing to register their guns. So when those of us who stated that this program is a waste of money and blatantly a make-work government program of theft, YOU ridiculously asserted that we were opposing gun registration because we have criminal intentions.

Notwithstanding the startup cost of the registry the essential mechanism is in place and in my view it ought to remain so. Whether or not the registry has produced tangible results is a matter of opinion.

Tangible results are a "matter of opinion"? My god, you say the stupidest things.

Gun violence in the larger cities is a symptom of a larger problem. Here in Winnipeg, within the last week there have been upward of seven shooting incidents not to mention several fire bombings. If and when weapons are found in such circumstances the registry may conceivably identify weapons that may not have otherwise been traceable. The registry in conjunction with other public policies are designed to mitigate some of the activities occurring on the street in order to provide a safer environment for the citizenry.

The gun registry will do nothing to assist in the investigation of crime. In the event of the location of a weapon suspected to have been involved in a crime in which the gun was fired, the police do not need to speak with the owner to whom the gun is registered - and that's assuming the gun was registered in the first place, which is completely independent of the existence of a gun registration database. If my legally-registered gun was stolen and used in a crime, how will that assist in a police investigation? You think if they find the gun in the criminal's possession, they're going to need my assistance in their investigation? It is pathetic how you cling to this mythology of a gun registration database actually assisting in the investigation of crime, as if crimes with guns are committed with legally registered guns by their legally registered owners.

I cannot fathom how someone thinks that criminals are out there performing crimes with guns legally registered in their names.

That you and I may differ on the need for a registry is a reflection of a split in public opinion which is born out by the polls.

So if public opinion supported your position, that'd make your assertions correct?

[Bob]

It provides an avenue of investigation, the same as automobile registration does, which may or may not prove usefull. When a car is stolen and used in a robbery the police can identify its legal owner by looking up its VIN number in the registration database from right inside their cruiser. They can then talk to its legal owner and potentially get valuable information... where was the car stolen from? When was it stolen? Did they see anything?

The exact same thing applies to firearms. If police know who the last legal owner was, they can talk to that person and get valuable information even if he WASNT the guy that commited a crime.

My god this argument is stupid. Guns are a little easier to hide than cars and they don't have big shiny license plates on them with relatively easy number/letter strings to remember. If someone witnesses a crime involving a car, it's not too unlikely that they'll make a point to recognize details of the car - car make and model, colour, and license plate. In the case of the gun, you shouldn't expect witnesses to recall make and model, or to have seen the gun's serial number.

There is simply no practical reason to have a gun registry. It will not provide any signifant assistance in the investigation of crime.

[pinko]

That is YOUR red herring. YOU intentionally misrepresented opposition to this wasteful program as being the result of criminal elements not wishing to register their guns. So when those of us who stated that this program is a waste of money and blatantly a make-work government program of theft, YOU ridiculously asserted that we were opposing gun registration because we have criminal intentions.

Tangible results are a "matter of opinion"? My god, you say the stupidest things.

The gun registry will do nothing to assist in the investigation of crime. In the event of the location of a weapon suspected to have been involved in a crime in which the gun was fired, the police do not need to speak with the owner to whom the gun is registered - and that's assuming the gun was registered in the first place, which is completely independent of the existence of a gun registration database. If my legally-registered gun was stolen and used in a crime, how will that assist in a police investigation? You think if they find the gun in the criminal's possession, they're going to need my assistance in their investigation? It is pathetic how you cling to this mythology of a gun registration database actually assisting in the investigation of crime, as if crimes with guns are committed with legally registered guns by their legally registered owners.

I cannot fathom how someone thinks that criminals are out there performing crimes with guns legally registered in their names.

So if public opinion supported your position, that'd make your assertions correct?

You seem to have a difficult time reconciling opinions that differ from yours. You have a tendency to repeat your rant without really moving forward.

[Oleg Bach]

People control..not gun control. If our population acts like crazed idiots - get them properly educated and functional - attacking an object like a gun is not the answer. Get rid of all the guns and they will resort to knives - get rid of the knives and they will resort to clubs - ban all the clubs and they will resort to rocks - ban the rocks and they will stangle each other.

[pinko]

People control..not gun control. If our population acts like crazed idiots - get them properly educated and functional - attacking an object like a gun is not the answer. Get rid of all the guns and they will resort to knives - get rid of the knives and they will resort to clubs - ban all the clubs and they will resort to rocks - ban the rocks and they will stangle each other.

Maybe the conservative fellow from rural Manitoba could try out your method by relocating himself, wife and children to a northend neighbourhood in the City of Winnipeg. Maybe Redwood Avenue or Atlantic Avenue or any other street in that area. Once in such a neighbourhood attitudes might change.

[Oleg Bach]

Maybe the conservative fellow from rural Manitoba could try out your method by relocating himself, wife and children to a northend neighbourhood in the City of Winnipeg. Maybe Redwood Avenue or Atlantic Avenue or any other street in that area. Once in such a neighbourhood attitudes might change.

Our cities have been ignored in so far as the poor parts of the population - When authority under the guise of social benevolance ghettoize the people in public housing - a non culture - culture forms...and usually a highly inferiour once prone to violence. I have seen this in toronto - where a single mother will not be allowed if she is taking money from the state to live in a good neighbourhood..that she will be force to live like a rat with the others that are percieved as lowly rats by our great leaders.

The biggest mistake is granting state assistance and the removal of free will at the same time. Put them in a big pile - give it 15 years and they will start to consume each other in a made dash towards survial - In my upscale hood - even the crack addicts are polite ...because they don't want to look like trash.

[Smallc]

Once in such a neighbourhood attitudes might change.

First, if you think I'm conservative, you have a very strange idea of the word. Second, I don't see how witnessing a gang war would in any way change my view on an ineffective gun registry.

[pinko]

Our cities have been ignored in so far as the poor parts of the population - When authority under the guise of social benevolance ghettoize the people in public housing - a non culture - culture forms...and usually a highly inferiour once prone to violence. I have seen this in toronto - where a single mother will not be allowed if she is taking money from the state to live in a good neighbourhood..that she will be force to live like a rat with the others that are percieved as lowly rats by our great leaders.

The biggest mistake is granting state assistance and the removal of free will at the same time. Put them in a big pile - give it 15 years and they will start to consume each other in a made dash towards survial - In my upscale hood - even the crack addicts are polite ...because they don't want to look like trash.

I take it you don't agree with the idea of a guaranteed income. There is nothing wrong with offering a person an opportunity through financial incentives. Secondly you obviously are in a more affluent space and as such may not be in touch with the realities on the street in the poorer neighbourhoods. Finally this idea of free will is largely the product of religon. I reject the premise of free will.

[pinko]

First, if you think I'm conservative, you have a very strange idea of the word. Second, I don't see how witnessing a gang war would in any way change my view on an ineffective gun registry.

Maybe you should try living in the northend. The price of real estate is cheap there. Just a word of caution though street gangs call the shots (pardon the pun). If your house is shot up the cops arrive some time after and those responsible are long gone.

Edited July 14, 2011 by pinko

[Wild Bill]

You seem to have a difficult time reconciling opinions that differ from yours. You have a tendency to repeat your rant without really moving forward.

It's frustration, obviously! Bob is very logical in his arguments and all he's getting back is the same illogical ideas, expressed in different words.

It's really very simple. Criminals do not register their guns. Most crimes are committed with unregistered weapons. A registry will not tell an officer that there is an UNREGISTERED gun behind a homeowner's door! Several billion dollars is not a reasonable price to pay for a gun registry full of errors.

These are pretty simple premises and for some people not to accept them is like talking to a thick wall!

[guyser]

How do you know that? As for myself, I would prefer to make my own choices as to my defense. Either that, or have those who don't think guns are necessary pitch their tents between mine and the bears...

Dont get me wrong, I am not against this.

Its just that many times it would not be effective.

For one, it is against the law to carry in a Prov or Fed park.

Two, most would have the gun nearby , holstered or not within reach. A bear attack results from only a couple of things. Its either sick, or a momma protecting cubs. In a surpirse scenario the bear would be on you so fast there isnt much one could do. Bears can stalk too.

Only truly experienced backwoods camper/hunters would be ready with a high powered rifle. A handgun, for the most part is iffy in stopping a charging bear

[pinko]

It's frustration, obviously! Bob is very logical in his arguments and all he's getting back is the same illogical ideas, expressed in different words.

It's really very simple. Criminals do not register their guns. Most crimes are committed with unregistered weapons. A registry will not tell an officer that there is an UNREGISTERED gun behind a homeowner's door! Several billion dollars is not a reasonable price to pay for a gun registry full of errors.

These are pretty simple premises and for some people not to accept them is like talking to a thick wall!

Bob may think he is very logical. I don't.

[pinko]

Dont get me wrong, I am not against this.

Its just that many times it would not be effective.

For one, it is against the law to carry in a Prov or Fed park.

Two, most would have the gun nearby , holstered or not within reach. A bear attack results from only a couple of things. Its either sick, or a momma protecting cubs. In a surpirse scenario the bear would be on you so fast there isnt much one could do. Bears can stalk too.

Only truly experienced backwoods camper/hunters would be ready with a high powered rifle. A handgun, for the most part is iffy in stopping a charging bear

The last thing I would want if I was camping is some dope with a gun in the tent next to me.

[fellowtraveller]

The funnniest thing about this thread is that pinko thinks Winnipeg is urban.

[pinko]

The funnniest thing about this thread is that pinko thinks Winnipeg is urban.

It is.

[bloodyminded]

According to Census Canada, it is the 7th largest city (by populace) in the country.

It is urban by definition.

(Including by the dictionary definition of "urban.")

Edited July 14, 2011 by bloodyminded

[noahbody]

For one, it is against the law to carry in a Prov or Fed park.

Two, most would have the gun nearby , holstered or not within reach. A bear attack results from only a couple of things. Its either sick, or a momma protecting cubs. In a surpirse scenario the bear would be on you so fast there isnt much one could do. Bears can stalk too.

Only truly experienced backwoods camper/hunters would be ready with a high powered rifle. A handgun, for the most part is iffy in stopping a charging bear

The problem with your argument is that it relies on the person being attacked being alone and isolated. If someone else at the campsite or a nearby campsite has a rifle, the adult of child being attacked could be saved.

Not that it makes a difference, but they've recently discovered most black bear attacks are due to male bears and not mothers protecting their cubs as previously thought.

[bloodyminded]

Are we really at the point where we're using bear attacks as an argument for or against the long-gun registry?

[guyser]

Naw, just a sidebar from the lunacy.

[Wild Bill]

Are we really at the point where we're using bear attacks as an argument for or against the long-gun registry?

Not as an argument for or against having it. Just as yet another example of how screwed up the LIBERAL gun registry is!

If the government came up with a cheap, easy and effective registry I don't think very many folks would have minded. The Liberal registry just confirmed a lot of people's cynicism towards government run programs.

I mean, having harsher sentences for not registering than for using a gun to rob a variety store was the height of smarmy callousness! Just another straw that eventually put the Liberals in the position they are today.

[Oleg Bach]

I take it you don't agree with the idea of a guaranteed income. There is nothing wrong with offering a person an opportunity through financial incentives. Secondly you obviously are in a more affluent space and as such may not be in touch with the realities on the street in the poorer neighbourhoods. Finally this idea of free will is largely the product of religon. I reject the premise of free will.

Money or no money - I have always managed to keep my family in good and "affluent" locations - Now that they are grown up - I still manage to keep my head above water. It is because I am diligent and put in the brain power to maintain and create a better environment for myself. I know where the bad hoods are...and I am in touch with those in poorer neighbourhoods..but to be honest with you - They are scarey people...put bluntly - barbarians...You can befriend them - help them - but one will turn up that is bound and determined to harm you - stupid poor people percieve me as some rich old guy - I am as poor as they are but better trained...I had smart and diligent parents. They do not.

The premise of free will only works in the decision making process if you are aware of the options - I am - they are not - It is a cultural thing - My parents were not big on church - even though my fathers best and life long friend was the son of an old Russian Orthodox minister...Even without attending the formal church..we still practiced and enjoyed the ancient values..

We did not steal - or undermine anyone. There was never the thought that hate was a way to percieve the rest of humanity - I guess I was lucky - those in trouble do not have the tools - It has been at least a few generations of lost tradition for these poor people/// They do not have the tools nor the options available to use free will wisely...It is about order - In my family a dog was loved and cared for - but was not on the same level as a child - Those folks we are talking about - You harm their dog and they kill you...what the hell is that?

[Hydraboss]

The funnniest thing about this thread is that pinko thinks Winnipeg is urban.

and that, despite all the ranting on both sides, people can't seem to understand that the single biggest opposition to the registry has basically nothing to do with guns.

"Search and seizure without warrant." The only reason I won't register any of mine. Right now, they need reasonable grounds to enter my premises. Not that I have anything to hide (except unregistered firearms), but I won't give them open access without permission.

Strikes me as hilarious that the people who scream about Harper and his boys and girls being jackboot freaks, are the same ones in support of the system that allows search and seizure without warrant.