O/T - Canadian Gun Registry - Your Thoughts?

[Farmer]

I am glad it is going the way of the DoDo bird . Wasted money , far too many mistakes , far to much personal information floating around .

As far as the registry helping find stolen guns --- another laugh . My residence way broken into way back in 85 or 86 . The little @#@@#$%#@ made of with a number of my long guns and a Model 29 S&W . ( which was registered ) It still has not turned up --- if it has the police have failed to contact me -------

The other long guns have not shown up either , even though the serial numbers were given to the police at the time of the break in . Surely the thieves /or people they sold them to , must have registered them . The registry would have found them otherwise right

[Valkyrie-Rider]

I can fill out the paper work and bring several guns into canada (Quebec ) and go hunting. Bring as much ammo as I want and not be questioned about it. Can bring the guns in and out for up to a year with no problems. Not registered and could commit a crime and if not caught go back and too with no problem. What I am trying to say is Gun Control Sucks and is only for the Government so that they control you and they do not care about the few crooks out there as they are crooks themselves. Birds of a feather flock togather. I hunt in Quebec as they have great hunting. I will be back.

[Raymond]

Here is some more info from the NSFAH Journal.

NSFAH Journal

End to the Long Gun Registry

The final dying breaths of the NDP and
Liberals could be heard in the federal
public safety committee meetings as
they both pleaded with the majority
conservative government to keep the
infamous long gun registry or at least
make changes that would allow the
provinces to set up their own.
It was satisfying to hear the painful
statements of the opposition who
only now realize that if they had
passed a previous bill to end the long
gun registry C-391 a private members
bill last fall that they would not find
themselves with a much tougher bill to
swallow.
Provisions to destroy the records of the
long gun registry did not exist in C-391
as they do in this new government Bill
C-19 along with a few other changes.
The Bill has now gone through 1st and
2nd reading. The public security
committee has heard from witnesses for
and against the bill and the committee
has completed clause by clause study of
the bill.
Page 2 of 6
The next step is to send it back to the
House of Commons for 3rd reading. After
that it will be sent to the senate.
The time line is not looking good for a
Christmas passing of the bill.
It is more likely that it will be passed in
February. That time line takes in the early
closure for Christmas of Parliament and
the long holiday period and by the time it
takes in the senate. There is always a
chance that the Liberals in the senate my
try and drag this out.
However, after 17 years to living with this
legislation I can wait until February. Merry
Christmas everyone. And remember the
old rules still apply until C-19 has finished
the fill course of legislation.
For additional information on the long gun
registry contact:
Tony Rodgers
Executive Director
Nova Scotia Federation of
Anglers & Hunters
902-477-8898

Raymond

[j.krug]

Here is some more info from the NSFAH Journal.

Provisions to destroy the records of the
long gun registry did not exist in C-391
as they do in this new government Bill
C-19 along with a few other changes.

C-391 didn't have the provision to destroy the data but it had some other provisions that gun owners really liked. It got rid of the LGR, got rid of POL, RPAL was sufficient to transport restricted (no more LTATT and a few other things.

Many in the shooting sports would have been more pleased had C-391 passed. This however is a good first step. This is the first time in Canadian that a gun law has been repealed....but hopefully not the last. There is still alot of bad legislation that needs to be changed or repealed.

The funny part is that the registration is the data so I'm not sure what the nay sayers had expected in the first place. Also, the moment the registry ends and guns are sold/traded the data will be useless and outdated anyway.

[Big58cal]

I've received this email several times through the years. I did a search for it on the internet and found it today. If you haven't seen it before, copy and paste the info into an email and send it to any of your friends/family.

As the saying goes, "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

*Gun History *

After reading the following historical facts, read the part about Switzerland twice

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control.. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

-----------------------------

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

------------------------------

You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.

With guns, we are 'citizens.'
Without them, we are 'subjects'.

During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends.

The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental.

SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN!
SWITZERLAND'S GOVERNMENT ISSUES EVERY ADULT THEY TRAIN A RIFLE.
SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!
IT'S A NO BRAINER!

DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.

I'm a firm believer of the 2nd Amendment!

If you are too, please forward.

Just think how powerful our government is getting! They think those other countries just didn't do it right.

Learn from history.

[DanO]

Years ago my (laid back) thinking was, "A long gun registry, no big deal, after all we register cars right?" And when I heard people warn that "Registration leads to confiscation.", I thought those folks were the radical fringe.

Then it started to happen here. Guns that were legal at the start of the registry were later re-classified as "prohibited" and were confiscated. If Grandpa forgot to renew his paperwork for his old duck gun that he hasn't fired in 25 years, the City of Toronto police came knocking on his door and took the gun away.

The more I looked into it the more I realized that the registry had nothing to do with reducing violent crime, preventing suicides, making policing safer or using gun serial numbers to solve crimes. The registry had no measurable effect on any of these yardsticks.

I realized that the reason the government put in place the registry was in fact to establish a mechanism with which to go after us and to get our guns when it suited the government to do so. The "radicals" were right after all.

We, the law-abiding gun owners, were the low-hanging fruit. The government knew it could never get the crook's guns, but they could get our guns very easily. And that would make them look good; they were doing something about "guns and gun crime".

But the government ran into two unforeseen problems:

1) The registry only picked up only half (maybe) of the long guns out there. The rest of the long guns remain quietly tucked away.

2) They underestimated the amount of opposition out there to the registry. Not just opposition from gun owners, but from taxpayers who recognized that the spending money on the gun registry to reduce crime was like spending money on curtains & wallpaper when your house needs a new furnace.

While the long gun registry will soon be gone, all gun owners in Canada will still be required to be licensed and to follow storage laws for our guns and ammunition. That license includes a background check as well as a sign-off from your spouse or common-law partner. In addition, all handguns, "prohibited weapons" and "restricted weapons" (including many semi-automatic long guns that the government has deemed "assault rifles") will still need to be registered. Handgun hunting remains non-existent in Canada. Even with the long gun registry gone, nobody other than the fear-mongering radicals will say that Canada has "lax gun control".

Summed up perfectly, Niner! And then there was the confiscation of the family heirloom shotgun after Grandpa died because the registration of the firearm hadn't been handled correctly and nobody in the family had a PAL. You're right about legal gun-owners being the low hanging fruit. I'd never register my guns if this ugly issue ever reared its head again.
Dan O.

[CanuckBen]

I am glad it is going the way of the DoDo bird . Wasted money , far too many mistakes , far to much personal information floating around .

As far as the registry helping find stolen guns --- another laugh . My residence way broken into way back in 85 or 86 . The little @#@@#$%#@ made of with a number of my long guns and a Model 29 S&W . ( which was registered ) It still has not turned up --- if it has the police have failed to contact me -------

The other long guns have not shown up either , even though the serial numbers were given to the police at the time of the break in . Surely the thieves /or people they sold them to , must have registered them . The registry would have found them otherwise right

Completely agree that the long gun registry was a complete waiste of money for a number of reasons.

One thing that I always ask when someone mentions that they had firearms stolen, be it non-restricted or restricted one, is how come they were stolen? Poorly store, as in hung on a wooden gun rack with an 1/8 cable through the bolt that would take 2mins to brake, or locked in a safe??

We do have storage restrictions and laws here, but it sure doens't mean that you can't go above that to ensure that your firearms are safely put away.

There's absolutely NO WAY that I would ever leave my $1900 rifle & $900 scope out of the safe, same goes for the shotguns.

Not saying that what you did. But I've seen it happen and shake my head everytime it does.

[CanuckBen]

I've received this email several times through the years. I did a search for it on the internet and found it today. If you haven't seen it before, copy and paste the info into an email and send it to any of your friends/family.

As the saying goes, "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

*Gun History *

After reading the following historical facts, read the part about Switzerland twice

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control.. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

------------------------------

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

-----------------------------

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

------------------------------

You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.

With guns, we are 'citizens.'
Without them, we are 'subjects'.

During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends.

The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental.

SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN!
SWITZERLAND'S GOVERNMENT ISSUES EVERY ADULT THEY TRAIN A RIFLE.
SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!
IT'S A NO BRAINER!

DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.

I'm a firm believer of the 2nd Amendment!

If you are too, please forward.

Just think how powerful our government is getting! They think those other countries just didn't do it right.

Learn from history.

The only issue I have with those statistics is that you must ASSUME that what...95%?...80%?....50%?...35% of them would have been able to defend themselves against trained soldiers. My guess is that less then 20% would have been able too for any sustainable period of time. On top of that, you do have to withdraw from it those who wouldn't be able to fight on their best of days, i.e young childrens, the older and weaker elderly, those w/o any firearm training, etc...

This isn't to say that I'm for Long Gun control, but when I see something that sorta kinda is presented like that, I cringe everytime.

[Raymond]

I will never ever register another firearm of any kind. Knowing what I know now and with what I have learned about after they had been registered. I had to do battle because of the Long Gun Registry, and I won. It was either win or go to jail . They didn't put me in jail. They didn't dare. What an uproar that would have made. They screwed up and they knew they did.
Raymond

[Big58cal]

The only issue I have with those statistics is that you must ASSUME that what...95%?...80%?....50%?...35% of them would have been able to defend themselves against trained soldiers. My guess is that less then 20% would have been able too for any sustainable period of time. On top of that, you do have to withdraw from it those who wouldn't be able to fight on their best of days, i.e young childrens, the older and weaker elderly, those w/o any firearm training, etc...

This isn't to say that I'm for Long Gun control, but when I see something that sorta kinda is presented like that, I cringe everytime.

Doesn't matter what the percentage was. Even if was 1%, that 1% would have had an option to defend themselves and made those trained soldiers duck for cover a little more than just straight marching in and taking over.

Look at all of the rioting that took place over in England during the summer. Sales of baseball bats were up 1,000% on Amazon.com. Riots, looting, robberies like that wouldn't have lasted any time in the US because the scum bags would have gotten shot!

There's another saying that goes, "God may have created man, but Samual Colt made them equal."

The same arguement on gun registration can be made about concealed carry. It's not the people who register their guns or take the time to get a CCDW permit that are the problem. These are law abiding citizens. It's the outlaws that you have to worry about. Laws to them doen't mean anything. That's why criminals target "gun free" zones. They know that the law abiding citizens there will be unarmed and defenseless whereas they will be armed.

[CanuckBen]

The only issue I have with those statistics is that you must ASSUME that what...95%?...80%?....50%?...35% of them would have been able to defend themselves against trained soldiers. My guess is that less then 20% would have been able too for any sustainable period of time. On top of that, you do have to withdraw from it those who wouldn't be able to fight on their best of days, i.e young childrens, the older and weaker elderly, those w/o any firearm training, etc...

This isn't to say that I'm for Long Gun control, but when I see something that sorta kinda is presented like that, I cringe everytime.

Doesn't matter what the percentage was. Even if was 1%, that 1% would have had an option to defend themselves and made those trained soldiers duck for cover a little more than just straight marching in and taking over.

Look at all of the rioting that took place over in England during the summer. Sales of baseball bats were up 1,000% on Amazon.com. Riots, looting, robberies like that wouldn't have lasted any time in the US because the scum bags would have gotten shot!

There's another saying that goes, "God may have created man, but Samual Colt made them equal."

The same arguement on gun registration can be made about concealed carry. It's not the people who register their guns or take the time to get a CCDW permit that are the problem. These are law abiding citizens. It's the outlaws that you have to worry about. Laws to them doen't mean anything. That's why criminals target "gun free" zones. They know that the law abiding citizens there will be unarmed and defenseless whereas they will be armed.

The % doesn't matter?? Interesting point of view on that to say the least. I thought you were have said a good 90%.

Let me ask you this. Have you ever shot someone in a self-defence situation? Have you every shot someone defending your store, truck or piece of property?

If you have not, I wouldn't be so quick to assume that you would be able to sqeeze the trigger and take someone's life, or in your example, scumbags.

Back to your original post - Do you sincerely believe that Japan didn't invade the US because "most Americans were armed". Do you not in the least beleive that there were many more circumstances other then that?

As far as it goes for gun politics in Switzerland, can you point out where you got the info that the gvt issues every household a gun?

[sipsey]

As to the facts about Swiss and guns, here is a link to an article by the BBC.
Here is an excerpt from the article, "Between the ages of 21 and 32 men serve as frontline troops. They are given an M-57 assault rifle and 24 rounds of ammunition which they are required to keep at home."



.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1566715.stm

[CanuckBen]

As to the facts about Swiss and guns, here is a link to an article by the BBC.

Not the the facts as in plural - but the one saying that the Swiss gvt issuing a gun to every household. They have licenses to own there as well, which means you have to apply for it and it be granted to you. Its not a right as that statement would lead you to believe.

The terms of owning the rifle that one gets during their milita training in Switzerland can lead someone to think is the retired personal may kept their army rifle (read : full auto) false. The rifle they chose gets modified to be a semi-auto rifle.

[Big58cal]

Let me ask you this. Have you ever shot someone in a self-defence situation? Have you every shot someone defending your store, truck or piece of property?

If you have not, I wouldn't be so quick to assume that you would be able to sqeeze the trigger and take someone's life, or in your example, scumbags.

No offense Ben, but you don't know me or know what I've been through. Neither you nor I (or anyone else for that matter) should ever assume anything about anyone.

With that being said, no, I have never shot anyone in a self defense situation. I have however have had a shotgun out pointed at the front door of my house at some scumbags that were trying to break in. I wasn't about to hesitate on pulling the trigger if that door had opened. It's amazing how quiet it gets after a pump shotgun is racked. That is a pretty well universally recognized sound that something bad is about ready to happen if things don't change.

To add to this, I spent several years in law enforcement and have had to draw my gun a few times on people. I didn't ever want to shoot anyone (and still don't), but given the option of either them or me, I know which I'm going to choose.

Now, back to the email......... The thing to remember and look at in all of those instances listed are that AFTER some kind of registration and confiscation scheme was implemented, people were systematically slaughtered because they had no way to defend themselves. A firearm is a great equalizer. You put a firearm in the hands of a 90 lb woman and have a 250 lb man coming at her to do her harm, I can just about guarantee you that the woman will not be the victim.

The point is, I would rather have a firearm and a fighting chance to save my life than to be a defenseless victim. I may still end up going down, but it won't be without a fight, I can guarantee you that!

[CanuckBen]

Let me ask you this. Have you ever shot someone in a self-defence situation? Have you every shot someone defending your store, truck or piece of property?

If you have not, I wouldn't be so quick to assume that you would be able to sqeeze the trigger and take someone's life, or in your example, scumbags.

No offense Ben, but you don't know me or know what I've been through. Neither you nor I (or anyone else for that matter) should ever assume anything about anyone.

Exactly my point. So why are you assuming it for all those who were slaughtered?

With that being said, no, I have never shot anyone in a self defense situation. I have however have had a shotgun out pointed at the front door of my house at some scumbags that were trying to break in. I wasn't about to hesitate on pulling the trigger if that door had opened. It's amazing how quiet it gets after a pump shotgun is racked. That is a pretty well universally recognized sound that something bad is about ready to happen if things don't change.

Here in Canada the terms of the law are not the same as in the US so there really isn’t any point of discussion. It will never happen up here. There is no right to bare arms. If I shoot someone with one of my firearms in my house I can guarantee you that it won’t be a open & shut case. That is just the way it is. There is NO WAY that a complete reversal would go smoothly as it is simply not at the center of our culture.

To add to this, I spent several years in law enforcement and have had to draw my gun a few times on people. I didn't ever want to shoot anyone (and still don't), but given the option of either them or me, I know which I'm going to choose.

I would say that this is a completely different angle all together.

Now, back to the email......... The thing to remember and look at in all of those instances listed are that AFTER some kind of registration and confiscation scheme was implemented, people were systematically slaughtered because they had no way to defend themselves.

Again there is the assumption that they can, but moving past that. Going back to your 1% as being acceptable (“even if it was only”), do you still feel that it would have been an effective deterrent to the actual cause of these horrendous killings??

What kind of gun controlled were these? Gun controlled as in having no possibility of owning any types of firearms all together, or gun control as say as what we have here in Canada, which isn’t a big deal at all. I’m intrigue by it so I surely will be looking it up.

And also, wouldn’t getting to the root of those killings be key to understanding this as well? You’ll quickly find that religion, bigotry, racism, etc – religion being first in line – will be x100 more responsible for those killing than the population being under some form of gun controlled.

The point is, I would rather have a firearm and a fighting chance to save my life than to be a defenseless victim. I may still end up going down, but it won't be without a fight, I can guarantee you that!

I as well.. The problem is, can we “assume” that 99% of the population (given the idea that right to bare arms is given to everyone) will know what how to use them, when to use them, make the right decision at the right time?

You were a police officer. Do you really believe that everyone should be allowed to have firearms? Because you can’t knit pick as to who can and who cannot. That’d be gun control right.