[Scape]

As federal politicians try to kill the always-contentious registry, Wendy Cukier, president of the Coalition for Gun Control, joins skeptical host Chris Selley to discuss whether we need it, what (if anything) it has accomplished, and why tough licensing laws may not be enough to keep Canadians safe.

[ridenrain]

Wendy Cukier is a paid off lobbyist for the gun ban people.
As an ivory tower professor, she presumes to tell us what we need.

What a remarkably fair minded debate also..

[Proculation]

Something that angers me about the long gun registry is that we could do SO MUCH with all the money spent (2 billions) to actually fight crime...

[DerbyX]

Proculation wrote:

Something that angers me about the long gun registry is that we could do SO MUCH with all the money spent (2 billions) to actually fight crime...

Except that the vast majority of that money was spent simply setting it up. It is now costing only peanuts and in fact would be making a small sum of money if Harper had not waived the fees it was collecting.

[ridenrain]

I thought you were against the registry?

[DerbyX]

We've already been through this on your "bitch about Toronto thread".

[ridenrain]

I know but I just like to hear you say that your against the registry.. over and over again.

[DerbyX]

Sorry but you obviously haven't been paying attention. I was against the massive cost of it. I see no reason why snotty gun owners shouldn't have to acquire a license to own a gun and to register that firearm. That coupled with the fact that police use the registry as an investigation tool means it should be kept.

Not quite the "gotcha moment" like say you being forced to admit that pot should be legal.

[Proculation]

DerbyX wrote:

Proculation wrote:

Something that angers me about the long gun registry is that we could do SO MUCH with all the money spent (2 billions) to actually fight crime...

Except that the vast majority of that money was spent simply setting it up. It is now costing only peanuts and in fact would be making a small sum of money if Harper had not waived the fees it was collecting.

Tens millions is not only "peanuts"...

[DerbyX]

Proculation wrote:

DerbyX wrote:

Proculation wrote:

Something that angers me about the long gun registry is that we could do SO MUCH with all the money spent (2 billions) to actually fight crime...

Except that the vast majority of that money was spent simply setting it up. It is now costing only peanuts and in fact would be making a small sum of money if Harper had not waived the fees it was collecting.

Tens millions is not only "peanuts"...

Sure it is when compared to total government expenditures but that's not the whole picture.

http://www.guncontrol.ca/English/Home/F ... ontrol.pdf

Why should gun owners be allowed off the hook when I have to pay to register my car or my pets?

No reasonable person should complain that gun owners should be licensed just like drivers are or that they should be required to register their guns again just like I do my car.

If you are worried about the cost to the tax payer then we can simply raise the registration fee which was set low (then not collected) because cost was secondary to its purpose.

[Proculation]

You have to register your pet ?? where do hell do you live ??

Btw, we were licensed before the registry. You couldnt have a gun without the proper permit and license. Like drivers. And long guns were registered when buying them with the vendor.

[DerbyX]

Proculation wrote:

You have to register your pet ?? where do hell do you live ??

Btw, we were licensed before the registry. You couldnt have a gun without the proper permit and license. Like drivers. And long guns were registered when buying them with the vendor.

Most cities have some sort or licensing/registering for pets like cats and dogs. Its mostly designed to ensure all pets have rabies vaccination. Toronto even has commercials running to that affect. I'd be surprised if Montreal didn't have something similar.

Still there is no reason why guns should not be registered as are cars. When buying the seller verifies the weapon in the buyers name and only licensed buyers can purchase. The gun cannot be resold (or given away. traded, etc) without the weapon being re-registered under the new owners name.

I can't see any reason why that would be a problem so long as the government was charging only reasonable fees. Everybody gets the guns they want to own and the government has a measure of control over who can legally purchase them and the police have a useful tool.

What do you see wrong with this?

[Proculation]

lol that's crazy: no we don't have to register our pets

What you seek is not only registration like car. You can sell a car to someone without filling bunch of papers. You have to register it and license it if you want to drive on public road.

What I see wrong is that's none of the government business if I have a gun or not and that with that law, we are guilty until proven innocent. That's like old school 1600 French monarchy justice. And like I said, IT WAS ALREADY DONE before: we had to register the gun when buying it, we had to have a permit, we had to have a license to buy.

That register only cost money and sent some candies to anti-guns people. Politics. And gave subsidized jobs to people in Miramichi who just lost them because of new fishing legislation.

[ttruscott]

39th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublicat...&Parl=39&Ses=1

39th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION
Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS
Wednesday, May 31, 2006

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublicat...=1#Int-1559519

Hon. Raymond Chan:
Secondly, as the Auditor General, who makes judgment calls on whether a system is efficient or not, you referred earlier, in response to a line of questioning, to police department usage as perhaps a good indicator of whether this system is productive or not. Would you say that if this has been adopted and police departments have been using it about 5,000 times a day, this would be a good indicator that the system is useful?

Ms. Sheila Fraser:
I believe that the indicator of the 5,000 hits a day is more of what we call an activity indicator than an indicator of effectiveness. So those law enforcement people who use the registry would have to give an assessment as to whether or not it was useful to them.

There could be 5,000 hits, and they could say yes, it was very helpful and helped me in this way; or they could say no, it wasn't helpful because the information wasn't correct. It takes an additional degree of interpretation or information to assess effectiveness.

Nos treet cop dedpends upon the registry when he enters a building. Only the Police Chiefs Ass. (paid lobby group) supports it and gets their money from the computer scompany that created the data base for the registry.

I'll believe that cops trust the gun registry when they start to leave their weapons locked in their cars when a registry hit says no weapons are registered at the home they are entering. Yeah, right...

[ttruscott]

We register cars, don't we?? Why fuss about guns?

Since Bill C-391 passed, a lot of howls of rage have been printed in the big city newspapers by people making money on running the pro-registry politics.

One of the more useless arguments in favour of gun registry is that we register cars, so why not guns?

If you are suggesting we make gun registration like car registration then I am all for it!


* The government will have to license me after I show the most basic ability to use my guns safely, unlike now.


* I will be able to own and use any gun I wish if I can pass a simple test showing I can use it safely, unlike now.

* No personal questions will ever be asked about why I am applying for a license, unlike now when the last 5 years of my bedroom history are scrutinized.


* I will be able to take any of my guns anywhere in Canada once I have my license, unlike now.


* I won't need a license if I keep my guns at home and don't take them out in public, unlike now.


* If my license expires I can renew it hassle free up to a year later without having my guns confiscated and destroyed, unlike now. The penalty for letting a license expire and then taking my guns out in public will be a very small fine instead of several years in prison, unlike now.


* Divorce will never be a reason to deny or revoke a license.


* The government will never be able to ban any gun in the same way they don’t ban cars even if they are over powered and the car of choice for street racers.


* Oh and the government will make an agreement with the US so that Canadians and Americans can freely bring their guns back and forth across the border.


Or were you thinking something else when you said treat guns and cars the same way?

Thanks to Cdnexpat: post #33 http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/sh ... 867&page=4