For or against long gun registry?

[AusKanada]

We have enough police officers, we just have them engaged in too many unnecessary places.

The War on Drugs is a great example. Time to end that ridiculous fight. You cannot legislate morality, and it's time to treat drug addiction as a health issue. The same can be said of prostitution, we are spending tons of money on drug related crime, and prostitution - a total waste of money.

And no, allowing all Canadians the same access to firearms as the criminals currently enjoy would not bring a spike in firearm related crime.

A law abiding citizen without a record is not going to turn into a homicidal maniac once he/she is able to have a gun in the house. People won't become bank robbers because there's no gun registry, and likewise we wouldn't need an increase in police presence.

To the contrary, the people who would commit those acts with firearms already do commit those acts with firearms they acquired outside of the current registry system. It makes sense to allow the rest of us to protect ourselves in the face of that reality.

Again, you're totally side-stepping the issue. Regardless what you believe it is a FACT that giving private citizens easier access to firearms will increase crime. There's no denial. Look at the United States, the bastion of private gun possession. Incredibly high homicide rates, fire-arms mortalities, etc. If you think we wouldn't need more police officers, you are already celebrating the end of the war on drugs with a big fatty.

[greyman]

Again, you're totally side-stepping the issue. Regardless what you believe it is a FACT that giving private citizens easier access to firearms will increase crime. There's no denial. Look at the United States, the bastion of private gun possession. Incredibly high homicide rates, fire-arms mortalities, etc. If you think we wouldn't need more police officers, you are already celebrating the end of the war on drugs with a big fatty.

Look deeper into the US's high homicide rates, and firearms-related deaths/injuries, and behind the curtain you find the root cause...drug prohibition.

End the war on drugs, you cut crime drastically, and likewise the need for the quasi-police state designed to keep us all dependent.

Stop legislating morality, end prohibition, allow the natural deterrent an armed citizenry provides, and you won't need more police officers, but less.

[bush_cheney2004]

Look deeper into the US's high homicide rates, and firearms-related deaths/injuries, and behind the curtain you find the root cause...drug prohibition.

Really? Does that mean that drugs are not prohibited elsewhere with lower firearms homicide rates...like Canada? Who knew!

[greyman]

Really? Does that mean that drugs are not prohibited elsewhere with lower firearms homicide rates...like Canada? Who knew!

What is with you? Are you looking for someone to step up and simplistically state that things are better in Canada than the United States?

You'll get no such admission from me. We're every bit as messed up here as in the US...maybe worse.

I've never said we don't have prohibition here. We're fighting a moronic war on drugs here, just like the Americans.

[AusKanada]

Look deeper into the US's high homicide rates, and firearms-related deaths/injuries, and behind the curtain you find the root cause...drug prohibition.

End the war on drugs, you cut crime drastically, and likewise the need for the quasi-police state designed to keep us all dependent.

Stop legislating morality, end prohibition, allow the natural deterrent an armed citizenry provides, and you won't need more police officers, but less.

Who's legislating morality? I am calling for the registration and regulation of firearms. No, just no. Organized crime is not a system of the drug trade, it existed in as far back as Republican Rome, long before narcotics. It won't be stopped by something as counterproductive as legalizing all drugs (something that would undoubtedly turn Canada into a backwater internationally). Likewise arming the populace excessively is an excellent way of encouraging violence, robbery and assault.

You don't make any sense in these forums, you decry democracy as "rule of the mob," i.e. the people cannot be trusted, but then support them having handguns and rifles?? Had a few cold ones tonight?

[greyman]

Who's legislating morality? I am calling for the registration and regulation of firearms. No, just no. Organized crime is not a system of the drug trade, it existed in as far back as Republican Rome, long before narcotics. It won't be stopped by something as counterproductive as legalizing all drugs (something that would undoubtedly turn Canada into a backwater internationally). Likewise arming the populace excessively is an excellent way of encouraging violence, robbery and assault.

You don't make any sense in these forums, you decry democracy as "rule of the mob," i.e. the people cannot be trusted, but then support them having handguns and rifles?? Had a few cold ones tonight?

Our government legislates morality at every turn. We've turned the regulatory pen into a tool of coercion, as a means to force people to conform to ever-stricter codes of conduct that will only serve to do just the opposite.

Your call for the registration and regulation of firearms is a call for legislation. And why do you want it?

Because you feel if that regulation didn't exist, people would behave immorally - THUS, you advocate legislating morality. And what you're not understanding is that you cannot do that by government decree. People behave how they behave because that's how we humans are. We've had laws against killing and robbing each other since before firearms even existed, yet has either of those things stopped? No. Will they ever stop? No.

Why?

Because that's what human beings do.

It's the same thing with owning knives, guns, bombs, or a car. Just about anything can be turned into a lethal weapon if the will is there. And that's just it, the will is ALWAYS going to be there. You cannot get rid of that motivation to kill by stroke of a pen, you just can't.

Will organized crime go away with drug prohibition? Perhaps not, but they'll be drastically undercut by making all drugs legal.

And really, when it comes down to it. What is prohibition for? Has it stopped or slowed drug use or the crimes that have come to be associated with it?

No, instead we spend millions every year on law enforcement, courts, and prisons to house people whose only crime was they were deemed less moral than the rest of us because they have what is essentially a health problem, i.e. addiction.

The point is, we have laws that deal with those who kill, or hurt one another. Are they perfect, no? But they are there so if some drug addled moron gets behind the wheel and kills someone they're punished. Likewise, if someone uses a gun to commit violence against another, we have laws on the books to deal with it.

Allowing people to do what they like as long as they obey the laws of not hurting or killing one another, is not tantamount to the crazy hell-hole you make it out to be, it would be an example of an enlightened nation that understands that with freedom, health, wealth, and happiness follows.

And yes, democracy means mob rule. In a democracy, you can still end up with 49.5% of the population unhappily living in a system they have not consented to creating. You can still end up with close to half the population of any given place paying a good chunk of their hard-earned money to fund programs they completely disagree with. That is not freedom, that is mob rule, and is no way to run a country.

Have I had a few cold ones? No, but it sounds like you've had LOTS of Kool-Aid.

[AusKanada]

Our government legislates morality at every turn. We've turned the regulatory pen into a tool of coercion, as a means to force people to conform to ever-stricter codes of conduct that will only serve to do just the opposite.

Your call for the registration and regulation of firearms is a call for legislation. And why do you want it?

Because you feel if that regulation didn't exist, people would behave immorally - THUS, you advocate legislating morality. And what you're not understanding is that you cannot do that by government decree. People behave how they behave because that's how we humans are. We've had laws against killing and robbing each other since before firearms even existed, yet has either of those things stopped? No. Will they ever stop? No.

Why?

Because that's what human beings do.

It's the same thing with owning knives, guns, bombs, or a car. Just about anything can be turned into a lethal weapon if the will is there. And that's just it, the will is ALWAYS going to be there. You cannot get rid of that motivation to kill by stroke of a pen, you just can't.

Will organized crime go away with drug prohibition? Perhaps not, but they'll be drastically undercut by making all drugs legal.

And really, when it comes down to it. What is prohibition for? Has it stopped or slowed drug use or the crimes that have come to be associated with it?

No, instead we spend millions every year on law enforcement, courts, and prisons to house people whose only crime was they were deemed less moral than the rest of us because they have what is essentially a health problem, i.e. addiction.

The point is, we have laws that deal with those who kill, or hurt one another. Are they perfect, no? But they are there so if some drug addled moron gets behind the wheel and kills someone they're punished. Likewise, if someone uses a gun to commit violence against another, we have laws on the books to deal with it.

Allowing people to do what they like as long as they obey the laws of not hurting or killing one another, is not tantamount to the crazy hell-hole you make it out to be, it would be an example of an enlightened nation that understands that with freedom, health, wealth, and happiness follows.

And yes, democracy means mob rule. In a democracy, you can still end up with 49.5% of the population unhappily living in a system they have not consented to creating. You can still end up with close to half the population of any given place paying a good chunk of their hard-earned money to fund programs they completely disagree with. That is not freedom, that is mob rule, and is no way to run a country.

Have I had a few cold ones? No, but it sounds like you've had LOTS of Kool-Aid.

I call for registration because I know exactly what a human being with a handgun has: an opportunity. I could hardly call myself a forward-thinking person if I didn't come to the logical conclusion that someone with a weapon might use it. If I have to register my car, why not my handgun? No one is asking for DNA databases or GSP trackers. I think also since a weapon is plainly an instrument of death, it's a tad different then you stabbing someone with a pen. The intent to kill will always be there, but enabling an easier manner of enacting that will is hardly wise. I think if you have a knife, versus a pen, you might be a tad more ready to do something with it.

Your total notion of justice is reactive, not preventative. It will do absolutely nothing to stop justice, as most right-wing Texans have come to admit. If all you're doing is punishing once a crime is committed you aren't preventing anything... by combating inner city poverty, increasing employment, funding anti-gang community policing and so forth you are actually reacting to the CAUSES of crime. You can throw every criminal that gets caught in a jail, but wait and tomorrow there are thousands more... if you don't actually correct the situation you're actions are futile. Criminals are have an ingenuity that law enforcement does not and will find ways to go around legislation, so unless you help keep citizens as lawful members of society you aren't actually preventing crime. You're just cleaning up the mess.

I think if everyone is legally allowed to vote and only 49.5% choose to do so, they have no right to complain at all. If your taxes are being used in ways you disagree, I suggest you form a party or influence one to advocate your position. Don't just go on forums and whine to get your point across.

[Guest Derek L]

I call for registration because I know exactly what a human being with a handgun has: an opportunity. I could hardly call myself a forward-thinking person if I didn't come to the logical conclusion that someone with a weapon might use it. If I have to register my car, why not my handgun? No one is asking for DNA databases or GSP trackers. I think also since a weapon is plainly an instrument of death, it's a tad different then you stabbing someone with a pen. The intent to kill will always be there, but enabling an easier manner of enacting that will is hardly wise. I think if you have a knife, versus a pen, you might be a tad more ready to do something with it.

Ahh, so you’re criminalizing a segment of society because they might do something…….Did you watch Minority Report on TV last night too?

As for being a “weapon”, that too is incorrect, since a “weapon” is something used to obviously inflict harm on someone or something else……I have an assortment of handguns and have never deemed them weapons.

Have you ever owned a handgun or handled one? If so, did you feel a sudden violent urge towards your fellow man?

[Tilter]

AusKanada, on 05 February 2012 - 05:00 AM, said:

I call for registration because I know exactly what a human being with a handgun has: an opportunity. I could hardly call myself a forward-thinking person if I didn't come to the logical conclusion that someone with a weapon might use it. If I have to register my car, why not my handgun? No one is asking for DNA databases or GSP trackers. I think also since a weapon is plainly an instrument of death, it's a tad different then you stabbing someone with a pen. The intent to kill will always be there, but enabling an easier manner of enacting that will is hardly wise. I think if you have a knife, versus a pen, you might be a tad more ready to do something with it.

What a crock

a human being with a handgun has: an opportunity

Driving a car down the street also creates an opportunity for murder, chopping onions does the same with a lot less noise.

If I have to register my car, why not my handgun?

Registration for handguns has been mandatory since 1934 been and there has never been a complaint from farmers or hunters about that necessity. The cost of registration was about 50 bux, paid by the gun owner. The stupidity of registering long guns will be gone like yesterday's farts and the smell of this stupid political move is about the same as those farts. The one good thing about the registry is that it doomed the minister who championed it to his political grave.

No one is asking for DNA databases or GSP trackers

DNA data bases are in vogue--- having rightly been asked for by the police forces of Canada. No user asked for GPS trackers but they are in every car & cell phone and are currently in use by all major security force in the world./

BIG BROTHER is watching you, especially if you are a criminal.

[greyman]

I call for registration because I know exactly what a human being with a handgun has: an opportunity. I could hardly call myself a forward-thinking person if I didn't come to the logical conclusion that someone with a weapon might use it. If I have to register my car, why not my handgun? No one is asking for DNA databases or GSP trackers. I think also since a weapon is plainly an instrument of death, it's a tad different then you stabbing someone with a pen. The intent to kill will always be there, but enabling an easier manner of enacting that will is hardly wise. I think if you have a knife, versus a pen, you might be a tad more ready to do something with it.

Your total notion of justice is reactive, not preventative. It will do absolutely nothing to stop justice, as most right-wing Texans have come to admit. If all you're doing is punishing once a crime is committed you aren't preventing anything... by combating inner city poverty, increasing employment, funding anti-gang community policing and so forth you are actually reacting to the CAUSES of crime. You can throw every criminal that gets caught in a jail, but wait and tomorrow there are thousands more... if you don't actually correct the situation you're actions are futile. Criminals are have an ingenuity that law enforcement does not and will find ways to go around legislation, so unless you help keep citizens as lawful members of society you aren't actually preventing crime. You're just cleaning up the mess.

I think if everyone is legally allowed to vote and only 49.5% choose to do so, they have no right to complain at all. If your taxes are being used in ways you disagree, I suggest you form a party or influence one to advocate your position. Don't just go on forums and whine to get your point across.

Don't you think the best preventative for crime is allowing people to do what they like, so long as they're not infringing on someone else's right to do the same?

[AusKanada]

Don't you think the best preventative for crime is allowing people to do what they like, so long as they're not infringing on someone else's right to do the same?

I am not arguing against the possession of handguns, feel free. I am however against making the process easy. Huge difference.

[Guest Derek L]

I am not arguing against the possession of handguns, feel free. I am however against making the process easy. Huge difference.

So you’re in favour of licensing then right?

[AusKanada]

Ahh, so you’re criminalizing a segment of society because they might do something…….Did you watch Minority Report on TV last night too?

As for being a “weapon”, that too is incorrect, since a “weapon” is something used to obviously inflict harm on someone or something else……I have an assortment of handguns and have never deemed them weapons.

Have you ever owned a handgun or handled one? If so, did you feel a sudden violent urge towards your fellow man?

I've never used my breadmaker in my kitchen before, does that make it a toaster??

I never said firearms create the violent tendency, I said they enable one to easier enact them.

[Guest Derek L]

I've never used my breadmaker in my kitchen before, does that make it a toaster??

I never said firearms create the violent tendency, I said they enable one to easier enact them.

I call for registration because I know exactly what a human being with a handgun has: an opportunity. I could hardly call myself a forward-thinking person if I didn't come to the logical conclusion that someone with a weapon might use it. If I have to register my car, why not my handgun? No one is asking for DNA databases or GSP trackers. I think also since a weapon is plainly an instrument of death, it's a tad different then you stabbing someone with a pen. The intent to kill will always be there, but enabling an easier manner of enacting that will is hardly wise. I think if you have a knife, versus a pen, you might be a tad more ready to do something with it.

So you’re suggesting the absence of firearms will eliminate the potential for violent tendencies? Could the same be said about alcohol, baseball bats or Kitchen knives?

Edited February 5, 2012 by Derek L

[greyman]

I am not arguing against the possession of handguns, feel free. I am however against making the process easy. Huge difference.

So, you're in favour of creating bureaucratic red tape that robs people of their hard-earned money, just "because"?

[greyman]

I've never used my breadmaker in my kitchen before, does that make it a toaster??

I never said firearms create the violent tendency, I said they enable one to easier enact them.

You can seriously harm someone with just about anything. The reason you don't is because the will to do it isn't there.

That will to do it doesn't just magically appear when you have a gun.

And for another thing, I should have as easy access to protect myself from those who mean to harm as those who won't obey the laws you're in favour of anyway. If they're bringing a gun to my home, my knife ain't cutting it...pardon the pun.

Edited February 5, 2012 by greyman

[Guest Derek L]

And for another thing, I should have as easy access to protect myself from those who mean to harm as those who won't obey the laws you're in favour of anyway. If they're bringing a gun to my home, my knife ain't cutting it...pardon the pun.

Having a Remington 870 close at hand is perfectly legal for protecting against predatory animals.

[greyman]

Having a Remington 870 close at hand is perfectly legal for protecting against predatory animals.

But since "the best defense is a strong offense" I oughta get out there and wipe out any and all predatory animals, just to be sure, right?

[Guest Derek L]

But since "the best defense is a strong offense" I oughta get out there and wipe out any and all predatory animals, just to be sure, right?

Then you would be labelled the predatory animal.

[Shakeyhands]

Having a Remington 870 close at hand is perfectly legal for protecting against predatory animals.

Ewww... an 870??? Invest in a real gun.

[AusKanada]

So, you're in favour of creating bureaucratic red tape that robs people of their hard-earned money, just "because"?

Again, stop putting words in my mouth. I said I am against making it easy, not "just because." I think that if you want to own a firearm, you should bear the expense of the rigorous checks that should be enacted in your case. I don't want someone who is mentally unbalanced to get easy access to firearms, so you can have 3 pistols as show firearms...

[AusKanada]

So you’re in favour of licensing then right?

Absolutely. I am not against licensing, I am for a gun registry or at least a thorough licensing process.

[Guest Derek L]

Ewww... an 870??? Invest in a real gun.

Hey, they’re dependable and have been around for years……..If they’re good enough for the police and military, they’re good enough for me………besides, I have lots and lots of real expensive guns in the safes.

[Guest Derek L]

Absolutely. I am not against licensing, I am for a gun registry or at least a thorough licensing process.

We’re already required to have a licence……The entire process involves the Government checking references, spouses, mental heath and criminal histories etc………If we’re deemed fit to own a firearm, that should be good enough.

[Shakeyhands]

Absolutely. I am not against licensing, I am for a gun registry or at least a thorough licensing process.

There is a pretty thorough process in order to possess and purchase firearms already.

I still support the registry though because:

1 - In cases of domestic abuse, assault against another member of the general pub or mental issue investigations, the police know there are firearms registered to the person and they can be confiscated while the process plays out and a decision can be made by the courts as to return them or not.

2 - I'm not a crazy person who thinks that the Russians are going to invade and look up what is our equivalent to the ATF Form 4473.

3 - I also think it does no harm, and any extra tool that we can have that forces responsibility on gun owners is good.