ToadBrother Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 Ok now I do not believe that the gun registry was ever capable of preventing every possible scenario.Expecially since we share the longest ungaurded border with the largest weapons manufacturing engines in the world. But it was a step in the right direction. To what? Disarming rural dwellers and farmers? It sure wasn't going to do anything about the large number of illegal firearms being used by actual bad guys. Aswell it needed to be amended and changed to increase the effectivness that it was inteded to have. Completely scraping it without any allternative could have dire consequences(not sure of grammar here). WWWTT And how could it be made more effective when the only people it targeted were the gun owners least likely to actually commit gun-related crimes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 And it sounds like you're almost routing for one to happen. It's pretty disturbing. That's exactly what it looks like from here, as if WWWTT is crossing his or her fingers for a mass murder involving a gun in order to give an event to the socialists and communists to exploit for political purposes. Anyone else notice how WWWTT has bounced around a few times in this thread? It seems as if in one breath he's stating that a gun registry or lack of one would have no impact on a future mass murder involving a gun, and then in another breath he's asking Shady, sarcastically and rhetorically, if he doesn't grasp the seemingly obvious connection between gun registries and mass murder shooting sprees. "If you sinserly believe a shooting spree in Canada and the gun registry are completely unrelated to one another then you've got some serious issues man!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 (edited) The registry never made sense to me as a crime fighting tool either. But here's the thing, it's impetus was far more the result of an insane act as opposed to a criminal act. Everyone keeps losing sight of that. Gun control was the only thing that ever made sense when it came to preventing Marc Lepine style shooting rampages. The Liberals attempt to be seen doing something in the wake of Lepine was rendered lame by the Conservatives deflecting the issue away from insanity and making crime the issue instead. Compounding this was/is the opposition fear of being seen as soft on crime. The registry spending boondoggle only helped fuel the outrage but I suspect it'll be peanuts compared to the boondoggle we're about to see the Conservatives cause now that the issue of gun control has morphed into an issue of crime control. We all know that some 90% of criminal gun use is being created and worsened by the war on drugs boondoggle. We're still no closer to preventing insane people from going on a shooting rampage than before Lepine and now we're actually going to create more criminals. It's really sad how much political capital has been made and lost in the wake of Marc Lepine's rampage. When you break down the numbers of how few social conservatives it's taken to steer this country down the dark fear filled path it's on it's freakin' scary how far off the rails our electoral system can really take us. Until the intelligent so called fiscally responsible conservatives grow a backbone and crack down and get tough on the irresponsibly stupid social ones amongst their ranks things will increasingly continue to get even more FUBAR. As dismally ironic a prospect as it sounds the only people who can turn this Titanic around at the moment are on the right wing. eyeball, that's a very interesting interpretaion of the past 30-40 years of Canadian federal politics. I happen to think that you're wrong but your viewpoint is interesting.Why is it wrong? Well, to start with, you seem to believe that the "war on drugs boondoggle" is the underlying force driving our federal politics. Consider this: if we were to legalize drugs (or even just marijuana), would we really avoid all these problems? And how many more problems would we create? Edited October 21, 2011 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yarg Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 That's exactly what it looks like from here, as if WWWTT is crossing his or her fingers for a mass murder involving a gun in order to give an event to the socialists and communists to exploit for political purposes. Anyone else notice how WWWTT has bounced around a few times in this thread? It seems as if in one breath he's stating that a gun registry or lack of one would have no impact on a future mass murder involving a gun, and then in another breath he's asking Shady, sarcastically and rhetorically, if he doesn't grasp the seemingly obvious connection between gun registries and mass murder shooting sprees. "If you sinserly believe a shooting spree in Canada and the gun registry are completely unrelated to one another then you've got some serious issues man!" wwwtt really doesn't know what he is talking about, clearly uneducated and seemingly not all that bright, it's pretty unfair for everyone to pile on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 eyeball, that's a very interesting interpretaion of the past 30-40 years of Canadian federal politics. I happen to think that you're wrong but your viewpoint is interesting. Why is it wrong? Well, to start with, you seem to believe that the "war on drugs boondoggle" is the underlying force driving our federal politics. Consider this: if we were to legalize drugs (or even just marijuana), would we really avoid all these problems? And how many more problems would we create? Well August, as far as problems, petty crime to feed the habits of crackheads would be greatly reduced if drugs were legal. At the serious crime level, drug lords would take a HUGE kick in their income. Some would say that they would only turn to other forms of crime but hey! They're already into those other forms and have been for centuries! You ask "how many more problems would we create?" I would ask "How many problems does any form of Prohibition create?" Prohibition gave Al Capone the money to become a gangster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 wwwtt really doesn't know what he is talking about, clearly uneducated and seemingly not all that bright, it's pretty unfair for everyone to pile on. Indeed, I wouldn’t jump on the guy when he clearly admitted that he doesn’t know enough about the topic, and has stated when he has the time, will research it further……..Like many before him, and the anti gun lobby as a whole, it’s an emotional response, to a topic that is clearly trumped up by the media. Yes shootings and gun crimes are tragic, much like traffic accidents and there clearly needs to be some level of safeguards. I feel, like the requirement to obtain a drivers licence prior to driving, gun ownership should be the same……..Will both methods allow some individuals to “slip through the cracks”, certainly. But this is no reason to condemn the vast majority for the mistakes of the few. I’d suggest to any opposed to gun ownership to educate themselves further……pay 20-40 bucks and go to a local gun club and learn to handle and use a firearm. Talk to the people at the club, you’ll be surprised that gun owners in Canada are just as diverse as our population, and after a brief education of the rules for the current Canadian firearms act, you’ll quickly see that they make zero sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 (edited) eyeball, that's a very interesting interpretaion of the past 30-40 years of Canadian federal politics. I happen to think that you're wrong but your viewpoint is interesting. Why is it wrong? Well, to start with, you seem to believe that the "war on drugs boondoggle" is the underlying force driving our federal politics. Consider this: if we were to legalize drugs (or even just marijuana), would we really avoid all these problems? And how many more problems would we create? I believe the underlying forces driving federal politics are electoral hopes and campaigns that are based on creating fear, loathing and divisiveness in the minds of voters. For what it's worth I'd also be willing to try criminalizing alcohol. I'm far more concerned about governing ourselves without consistent principles. Having two separate sets of rules for the very same behaviour causes nothing but problems. Edited October 21, 2011 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yarg Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 (edited) McMaster study finds gun laws don't affect murder rate http://www.thespec.com/news/local/article/612534--mcmaster-study-finds-gun-laws-don-t-affect-murder-rate Amazingly though groups still hang onto the registry, "It’s important to recognize that in 2008, (according to the most recent statistics) 26 per cent of homicides (in Canada) were by rifles or shotguns, and the majority of firearm-related spousal homicides were by long-guns,” said Snider." ....thats sort of the point idiot, it the registry isn't preventing or solving any of those murders, and fyi, you cant register a sawed off shotgun, rifles and shotguns accounted for 17 percent of firearms homicides, handguns, registered for 80 years..60 percent. So as a percentage of all homicides long guns come in around 5.5 percent, but wait, theres more, of those how many were legal.. Well that number is around 2 percent, 2 percent of all homicides in this country are commited with a leaglly registered firearm on average about 12 out of 608 in 2008. "Firearm homicides up 24% since 2002" http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2009004/article/10929-eng.htm It doesn't seem the registry is helping, and since the vast majority of gun crime in this country is commited with handungs and is gang related, just where do you think that increase is coming from...It just goes to show that no gun law will reduce already illegal gun activity, banning or restricting something that is already owned illegaly only punishes the law abiding, as does the gun registry. Wake up people. Edited October 21, 2011 by yarg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 This comment on that article is hilarious: Why the government that thinks law enforcement doesn't need to know how many guns I own is the same government that thinks law enforcement should know everything I do on the internet. The ideological dissonance is boggling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 This comment on that article is hilarious: Regarding internet laws/privacy, and their relation to gun laws, the comparison is completely apples to oranges…….from a pragmatic approach, the Government of Canada, has no way to realistically count the numbers of firearms, both purchased illegally and legally but not registered prior to the gun registry…….It would be like trying to honestly determine how many Canadians have tried Pot or have driven over the speed limit. The Gun registry does next to nothing to keep Canadians, including police officers, safe from those that wish to commit gun related crimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noahbody Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 You can't really prove or disprove that the Registry works or doesn't work. Four or five years ago, a police officer was shot dead in the driveway of a house, before he even got out of his truck. I think it happened in Hill River, but I might be mistaken. Do we know the gun registry was checked? Yes, because it's checked automatically. If the police officer had known there was a gun in the house, I think it's logical to assume he would have approached the house with caution. But he didn't and he's dead. One of the officers who spoke out against the registry said he had to de-program recruits because putting trust in the registry can be deadly. No matter what the registry told the officer above, he is dead because he didn't use caution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 Four or five years ago, a police officer was shot dead in the driveway of a house, before he even got out of his truck. I think it happened in Hill River, but I might be mistaken. Do we know the gun registry was checked? Yes, because it's checked automatically. If the police officer had known there was a gun in the house, I think it's logical to assume he would have approached the house with caution. But he didn't and he's dead. One of the officers who spoke out against the registry said he had to de-program recruits because putting trust in the registry can be deadly. No matter what the registry told the officer above, he is dead because he didn't use caution. Exactly, and it’s rather safe to assume that the type of person that would murder a police officer, wouldn’t be too bothered about registering a firearm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted October 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 Wow lots of slanderous comments being made about me on this thread,and by the usual people of course. It seems that a few people here are under the impression that I do not know what I am talking about when it comes with the gun registry? Thats funny because I don't recal claiming to be an expert or even being that informed really.And why should I?I careless about freekin guns. You know who else who doesn't know much about guns or the registry?The majority of Canadian voter! Good luck predicting how they're going to react! WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 By voting Conservative again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yarg Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 Fyi, if i alluded to your stupidity, it's because you are actually stupid, complaining to the moderators won't change your predicament. lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tilter Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 That's exactly what it looks like from here, as if WWWTT is crossing his or her fingers for a mass murder involving a gun in order to give an event to the socialists and communists to exploit for political purposes. Anyone else notice how WWWTT has bounced around a few times in this thread? It seems as if in one breath he's stating that a gun registry or lack of one would have no impact on a future mass murder involving a gun, and then in another breath he's asking Shady, sarcastically and rhetorically, if he doesn't grasp the seemingly obvious connection between gun registries and mass murder shooting sprees. "If you sinserly believe a shooting spree in Canada and the gun registry are completely unrelated to one another then you've got some serious issues man!" I lived about 5 blocks from the shooting of 11 people in Vernon BC on a very (to then) peaceful Sunday morning. The shooting was by a victim's ex-- using 2 legally obtained pistols & a shotgun, by the ex who had been prohibited from owning guns due to violence & deadly threats to the ex-wife & her family. I fail to see any glimmer of brightness made by the registration act in this horrific mass murder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted October 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 Fyi, if i alluded to your stupidity, it's because you are actually stupid, complaining to the moderators won't change your predicament. lol. No actually complaining to the moderators will be in the effort to help and improve the quality of the contributions made to this forum! WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 If you sinserly believe a shooting spree in Canada and the gun registry are completely unrelated to one another then you've got some serious issues man! WWWTT Make up your mind, you've flipped and flopped a couple times already in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted October 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 Make up your mind, you've flipped and flopped a couple times already in this thread. I bear no responsibility for your misinterpreting of what I have written! My intent for this thread was about the "perception" that Canadians will have "about" the gun registry "after" it is gone. If you had thought that I was supporting,advocating for or attempting to re-initialize this piece of legislation than you have failed to properly coherently attempt to read/recognize what I have actually written or was trying to convey! Your attempt to try and discredit me because you do not like my opinion is typical of those who fail to obtain anything "concrete" to promote their argument! In other words your wasting my time! WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted October 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2011 Well I wonder how the Canadian public will react if after the gun registry is gone the murder rate in Canada goes up? Will Canadian voters contribute the gun registry for a lower murder rate in Canada? WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted October 27, 2011 Report Share Posted October 27, 2011 Well I wonder how the Canadian public will react if after the gun registry is gone the murder rate in Canada goes up? Will Canadian voters contribute the gun registry for a lower murder rate in Canada? WWWTT Doubt it, the murder and violent crime rate in Canada has been falling since the late 70s…….As for the optics, well another “gun registry” will be even less effective than the last……….You watch, within a year, the growing campaign to do away with the Handgun registry, the current classification of firearms and possibly the entire PAL/RPAL will pick up steam…….whether they’ll be effective is a mugs game……..The true Holy Grail of Gun owners is doing away with the ATT & concealed carry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 27, 2011 Report Share Posted October 27, 2011 Doubt it, the murder and violent crime rate in Canada has been falling since the late 70s…….As for the optics, well another “gun registry” will be even less effective than the last……….You watch, within a year, the growing campaign to do away with the Handgun registry, the current classification of firearms and possibly the entire PAL/RPAL will pick up steam…….whether they’ll be effective is a mugs game……..The true Holy Grail of Gun owners is doing away with the ATT & concealed carry. I think you've tipped over into fantasy. The Tories are willing to take a hit in Quebec (it's not like it will hurt much) and in some urban ridings (where their support is iffy anyways). But if you seriously think the entire notion of gun control as it is known is going out the window, then you haven't been paying attention to the game Harper's playing. The long gun registry buys him lots of political capital with his party but he's not going to completely abandon large chunks of the electorate simply to appease what I consider to be a minority of gun owners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 27, 2011 Report Share Posted October 27, 2011 and possibly the entire PAL/RPAL will pick up steam…….whether they’ll be effective is a mugs game……..The true Holy Grail of Gun owners is doing away with the ATT & concealed carry. You might get somewhere on the first two things you mentioned, but the above isn't going to happen in Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted October 27, 2011 Report Share Posted October 27, 2011 Whether I agree or disagree with the existence of the registry aside (it really doesn't matter since it's going to go), I find it incredibly stupid that the Conservatives will not allow provinces to use the information to setup their own data sets. You can't in one breath complain about how it's a waste of federal dollars, then turn around and waste them even further by just flushing all of the information down the toilet. If Quebec or Ontario want to setup their own LGR, they should be able to use the info from this one to set those up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 27, 2011 Report Share Posted October 27, 2011 they should be able to use the info from this one to set those up. Why? It isn't the government's information to share. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.