1  2  3  Next

[QUOTE by Brent Swain]</b> When do we Canadians get to have a referendum on the grossly overpriced gun registry?<b>[/QUOTE]<br /> When you elect a parliament that will hold one. Pick your MP accordingly.

   

I don't think it's fair to say that any gun registry program would cost us way too much, just that the program we now have has been horribly mismanaged. A gun registry can work, but we need more government transparency and accountability first.<br /> <br /> Besides, trying to repeal the gun registry laws now would be unwise for any political party trying to win more seats in the populous GTA. After a surge in gun violence this past year, any party that tries in anyway to decrease the control of guns in this country will be punished at the polls.<br /> <br /> Now, I know that this might all sound a little metro-centric, but those of us in rural and urban areas need to compromise on these matters.

   

[QUOTE BY= lesouris]<br /> Besides, trying to repeal the gun registry laws now would be unwise for any political party trying to win more seats in the populous GTA. After a surge in gun violence this past year, any party that tries in anyway to decrease the control of guns in this country will be punished at the polls.<br /> <br /> Now, I know that this might all sound a little metro-centric, but those of us in rural and urban areas need to compromise on these matters.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Nope. Gun violence in Toronto proves the gun registry does not and can not work. Once Torontonians see the Liberals have made no progress towards controlling gun violence, then steps can be taken to end the waste of money that the gun registry is, and start putting more cops and border patrols in place to stop the guns (that will never be registered anyway) from entering Canada in the first place.<br />

   

The surge in gun violence is a prime example of what a total failure , and total waste of 2 billion dollars the registry has been.This is exactly what we were told that the gun registry would prevent, at a promised cost of under 1 million dollars( as opposed to two billion). When governments want advice on what to do who do they ask first? The Bureucrats. What do the bureaucrats advise them to do? Whatever will maximise the flow of taxpayer dollars to the bureaucrats.Parkinson's law overules all others.<br /> Opinion polls have shown that a substantial majority of Canadians want the registry scraped andtyhe money redirected to things which will actually save lives , like preventing homeles people from feezing to death, or maintaining our health care system. <br /> Trying a different system would me a matter of repeating the mistake with more or less the same multi billion dollar results.<br /> I think that voters will overwhelmingly reject repeating or continueing the scam.<br /> It's like marriage for some people. The belive in it so strongly that they keep trying it ,over and over again and again.<br /> Brent

   

I just heard that the current cost of maintaining the registry is 100 million a year, or a billion for the next ten years, plus inflation. Given the rise in gun crime since it's inception,something we were told it would prevent, what do we have to show for the expenditure.<br /> Brent

   

The best article I've seen on the gun registry and the reason for the overruns is here:<br /> <br /> http://maritimes.indymedia.org/mail.php?id=7927

   

It looks as if the Liberals' decision to enable them to change and modify the gun registry by order in council without having it debated in the house will provide Harper with the means of dismantling it by orders in council, without having to aquire a majority of votes in the house, or even debate it for that matter.If he should fail to act quickly he will become just another Mr Dithers like that last PM ,the Maxwell Smart impersonator the Liberals just had fired by Canadians.<br /> Failure to act quickly will lose him the rural support that he is so dependent on, without which he will stand little chance of ever forming a government again.<br /> Hopefully this will quickly become a non issue in Canadian politics for decades to come.<br /> Brent<br />

   

Does anybody know what the gun registry actually DOES? The only thing worse than spending billions on a bad program is simply to see it all flushed. I can't see how it costs THAT much keep information in a database, hell, I can do it for $4.95 a month!

   

I read somewhere, some time ago, that the cattle ear tag computorised system that keeps track of canadian cattle and apparently works very well, does exactly the same as the gun registry (ie tracks regestered items and their movement)with more entries at a much lower cost. Thats not to say that the gun regeistry does anything to reduce gun crime, thats annother issue!

   

To apply for a gun licence , you are asked many very intrusive questions about your personal relationships, and anyone who has a grudge against you can veto your application by making false , unprovable accusations against you. You are presumed guilty until proven innocent of such accusations.If you happen to be seen giving the time of day to some stranger who has beeen barred for life from owning a gun or who has a violent criminal record, then you too can be barred for life.This applies even if you live in wilderness areas and have polar bears , grizzlies or cougars regularly in your back yard. This applies even in the far north where a head of lettuce costs around ten dollars but you are surrounded by caribou.Is this the case with cattle ear tags?<br /> The gun registry allows police to enter your home anytime and take whatever they want and keep it indefinitly without proof or a warrant. It allows police to send you to jail for up to two years by simply accusing you of not fully co-operating with them or by not fully answering their quesations.You are presumed guilty until proven innocent.<br /> It provides a computerised shopping list for thieves looking for homes to break into to steal guns.It increases the value of those guns. It makes illegal gun ownership a status symbol for punks. Before the registry a gun was often thought of as a farm implement. Where's the status symbol in owning a common farm implement? The pentagon has not proven to be immune to hackers . Why would anyone believe the gun registry is immune? We will never be told how many of the stolen handguns used in crimes were stolen with the help of the gun registry.It reduces the odds that a thief breaking into a home will encounter a resident who is armed, leading to a drastic increase in B&E's while the residents are home.<br /> Is this also the case with cattle ear tags?<br /> This is what the gun registry does to civil rights of Canadians. What it doesn't do is prevent crime. It does absolutly nothing about what it is supposed to do.it has cost us 2 billion dollars som far and costs us 100 million a year. Keep an eye on the auditor generals report on it due this february. It will explain a lot of what the costs are.<br /> Much of the scosts are creating the illusion of security. How much of the cost of cattle ear tags are caused by security concerns around the chance of people stealing them? Guns are not ear tags.<br /> Somer have said that it lets police know if their is a gun in a home to which they are called for a domestic dispute. A senator Gerry St Germain ,who is an ex cop on Vancouver's notorious main and Hastings area said "Bullshit. If you rely on the info of a bureucrat to that degree , as a cop in a big city, your life expectancy will be very short.You have to assumne that there is a gun handy regardless of what the gun registry tells you, making the registry a complete waste of time and money."<br /> Brent

   

This whole anti gun registry hysteria could very well be fuelled by the gun manufactorers who are worried about lost business.<br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.pulse24.com/News/Top_Story/20060205-002/page.asp">Here is an interesting article, from Toronto's Pulse24</a><br /> <br /> "According to Durham Police, 40 handguns were stolen from an Oshawa collector’s home on Friday and after the unprecedented violence across Toronto in 2005, that report was apparently the last straw for Bryant.<br /> <br /> He’s asking the federal government to give him the right to ban handguns in Ontario, and if prime minister-designate Stephen Harper says no, Bryant said he’ll see if the constitution will allow the province to take that step on its own.<br /> <br /> Handguns should only be in the hands of police, the military and Olympic sharpshooters, Bryant says, adding the legally-owned weapons are still a threat to the public, even if they are stored as the law states.<br /> <br /> The arsenal in Oshawa was properly stored and authorities said charges probably won't be laid against the owner."<br /> <br /> Ok, so 40 more guns will be on the street. That could very well mean 40 more deaths, 40 more grieving families. It's time to say NO to the gun lobbists. It's time to register all weapons and try to reduce their numbers, before more such incidents occur. Punishment is one thing that can and should be done, reducing the availability of weapons is another. Registering weapons is a great idea, I don't understand why so many people have a hard time fill out a short form to register a deadly weapon. Is reading and writing a problem?<br /> <br /> Btw, years ago, when the gun registry was introduced, there was a massive protest against it in Toronto. The protesters ignored the fact that over 70% of Canadians supported the gun registry. To Dr. Caleb's call for a referendum: let's have one!

   

Not to be rude, but anybody who actually thinks that the 'anti gun registry' is a 'hysteria' which may be fuelled by gun manufacturers simply hasn't even bothered to read many of the posts on this thread. There are MANY reasons to be against the gun registry and blanket statements like '70% of canadians support it' amounts to nothing. <br /> <br /> In fact, the above is complete garbage as anybody knows quite well. The provinces have ALL the powers over gun enforcement, which is merely one of the reasons that it is so ineffectual-most of the provinces have opted out of the program completely. Alberta and New Brunswick have gone as far as to say that NOBODY will be prosecuted under the many federal laws built into the bill. <br /> <br /> Of course this merely underlies the stupidity of national laws. Why should a rural area, where rifles are a necessity, need to concern itself with such a program? Particularly when handguns are completely irrelevant there. <br /> <br /> However, most rural people are against the gun registry, not so much whether handguns are illegal or not, since they are much more rare in rural areas. In seeing the direction Canada is taking I have come to believe the complete opposite and by no means think that ONLY law enforcement and military should have guns. Most people look around the world and think that violence can't happen here, those kinds of delusions forget the violence of our past, both here in Canada and , well, the world. You are in far more danger from your own government than you are from the various bogeymen concocted by media.<br /> <br /> Handguns aside, as for the gun registry, since most people do not own guns, there is little legitimacy in having a referendum. It's like when germany had a referendum on whether to annex austria-suprise suprise, most germans voted for it. When you aren't affected, you have no right to legislate the needs of others.

   

[QUOTE]There are MANY reasons to be against the gun registry and blanket statements like '70% of canadians support it' amounts to nothing. [/QUOTE]<br /> Well, no, democracy is all about numbers.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE]most rural people are against the gun registry[/QUOTE]<br /> Most rural people I know don't even know why they are against it. They were told to so they are. It's a massive hysteria, fuelled by the gun makers.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE]Most people look around the world and think that violence can't happen here, those kinds of delusions forget the violence of our past, both here in Canada and , well, the world. You are in far more danger from your own government than you are from the various bogeymen concocted by media.[/QUOTE]<br /> The undisciplined army of rural folks, armed with hunting rifles, would last roughly 10 minutes against a small professional army. It would be no contest. However, an armed crowd would give an army excuse to fire at them in self defense. Realistically, I don't believe that any Canadian political leader could force the Canadian army to shoot at unarmed Canadian civilians. In the 90s after the Yugoslav war there was a huge protest in Belgrade in front of the parliament. The army that guarded the parliament didn't dare to resist and turned the other way. Some governments sometimes make the choice of shooting at their people and usually pay for it dearly. It's not as easy at it sounds.<br /> <br /> However.... nowadays governments rule via the media. Gun fanatics are usually right wingers and a whole lot of them are not particularly well informed either. For a sinister government it would be easy to manipulate this armed crowd for their own purposes and turn them against their own people who happen to disagree with their views. Keep this in mind.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE]Handguns aside, as for the gun registry, since most people do not own guns, there is little legitimacy in having a referendum.[/QUOTE]<br /> Please... don't do this. It's too funny. ))<br /> <br /> [QUOTE]It's like when germany had a referendum on whether to annex austria-suprise suprise, most germans voted for it. When you aren't affected, you have no right to legislate the needs of others.[/QUOTE]<br /> Khmmm... most Austrians supported the German Anschluss, they greeted the German army with a shower of flowers. Austrians happen to be Germans, they speak German with a dialect. Hitler was from Austria.

   

[QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> Well, no, democracy is all about numbers.<br /> [/quote]<br /> <br /> No, democracy is about the majority rule and free elections. Not about pulled-it-out-my-butt statistics.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> Most rural people I know don't even know why they are against it. They were told to so they are. It's a massive hysteria, fuelled by the gun makers.<br /> [/quote]<br /> <br /> Your Honour, let the record reflect that badsector has presented the 'ignorant hayseed' argument, 'big business propaganda conspiracy' variant. Johnny Cochran will now counter with the 'Wookie Defense'.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> Gun fanatics are usually right wingers and a whole lot of them are not particularly well informed either.<br /> [/quote]<br /> <br /> Let the record reflect this diagram showing the complete lack of newspapers, telephones, satellite TV and internet connectivity outside of a 10km radius from major city centres.<br /> <br /> Please note your honour, anyone who needs to keep a gun on their farm is now to be referred to as 'fanatic right winger'. Guns will no longer be kept to control any predatory animal, such as coyotes or wolves. Control of these animals will now be through the use of poisons. Even though poisons can be injested by animals other than predators, and even small children, it is preferred that these predators suffer a slow, convulsive death rather than the gun companies invisible propaganda be effective. <br /> <br /> Any sick or injured livestock should be dispatched using an axe, sledgehammer or shovel, as may be appropriate. This method is preferred to prevent new gun sales, even though these ignorant hayseeds bought that rifle 50 years ago and it still works like new. And probabally will for their children too.<br /> <br /> But, they are ignorant hayseeds, and don't understand how dangerous a rifle or handgun can be to pretty white girls in major cities.

   

Nobody is talking about taking long guns away from rural people though, Doc. Registering them is relatively quick and painless. I have no problem wih the gun registry except for the cost over-runs etc.<br /> <br /> It isn't just fanatical right wingers that are against the registry though. They tend to be the most vocal because the Reform/Alliance/Conservatives have been using it as a wedge issue from the start, but if you talk to NDP supporters in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, especially the rural areas, they are against it too. <br /> <br /> I really think the NDP should be able to come up with some sort of reasonable compromise on this. They are the party that's most split and the party most misrepresented on the issue. I think if they would have picked up a couple of seats in Saskatchewan, it might even have become possible for them to do something about it. Without those seats, they'll just skirt the issue though.<br /> <br /> Vic Toews is musing about getting rid of the registry without going to the House of Commons for it though. That's as undemocratic as it gets and any such attempt should be opposed by everybody, no matter which side of the issue they're on.

   

1  2  3  Next