[Dr Caleb]

[QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> Good idea too. Yet, noone proposed to ban long guns, people were just asked to register them, so if a stolen weapon is used in crime, at least the recorded history of the weapon can give the police some clues.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> You mean, like we have been doing since the 70's? So, why do we need a $2 billion new registry (which ends up being a vector *for* crime) to do this?<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> The police use the gun registry thousands of times every day. If there is a domestic disturbance and the cops are called, they use the registry to cehck if there is a registered weapon on the premises, which on most cases can help them with their approach. Obviously, if there is an angry guy beating up his wife and police knows he has a gun for sure, they will approach with extra caution.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> And if you read link 1, in my post above: "# 6: C-68 GUN REGISTRY IS RIDDLED WITH ERRORS AND USELESS TO POLICE"<br /> <br /> Any cop that enters a domestic disturbance, or a private residence is *always* wary that there may be weapons on the premises, whether the 'registry' tells them so or not. To do otherwise is irresponsible.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> Since the introduction of the gun regsitry roughly 600 lives per year are saved and gun robberies decreased by over 60%. To me that's a good enough reason to support gun control. Roughly 80% of Canadians agree.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> More meaningless, unsubstantiated statistics.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> <b>FACTS ARE FACTS ARE FACTS:</b><br /> The most gun happy country in the developed World, the United States, has skyrocketing murder rates, especially murders comitted by firearms. It's a fact gun crazy brainwashed rednecks conveniently ignore. When the US will have lower gun crime than Canada, I will accept that their approach to crime is better. For now, Canada is magnitudes safer, so I'll go with the Canadian way.<br /> Facts, you know.... facts....<br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Again, facts earlier in this thread show that States that have "Conceal" or "Open Carry" laws (meaning you can ethier openly wear a firearm, holstered on your hip like in Texas; or Concealed in your jacket, purse or the small of your back) have a *lower* incidence of armed robbery and gun related crimes. These States have a lower incidence of gun crime than Canada.<br /> <br /> I guess by your statement that you will now support people carrying firearms, based on statistics. Note, that no one is yet forcing you to buy firearms.

[Brent Swain]

I just checked your previous postings.<br /> Interesting that on April 6th you said that 400 lives have been saved . Today you say it is 600 lives . That is 200 lives saved in 4 days . So much for the credibility of the statistics you claim to have. Like most arguements used to justify this massive screwup, you are simply picking numbers out of thin air. This and other loony tune comments you have made about wild west shows leaves any other numbers you quote totally devoid of any crediblity. Just like the other opponents of the registry. <br /> Such feeble attempts to justify the collosal waste of money and collosal attacks on rural living ,don't justify it's continuation. In fact they make even stronger arguements for scrapping it, if these are the only ways it can be justified.<br /> Per capita gun ownership is higher in Switzerland than in the US , yet their gun crime rate is far less than that of the US<br /> Brent

[badsector]

All right folks, here is a fair article that doesn't take sides and seems to except arguments from both sides: <a href="http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Guns-and-crime">link.</a> You may argue that the article proves your points but then it also proves mine. <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/smile.gif' alt='Smile'><br /> <br /> "A European example would be to compare the violent crime levels between the United Kingdom which has very strict rules against gun ownership and self-defense and Switzerland which has widespread private gun ownership and which maintains the right to self-defense. According to Interpol data, in 2002, homicides were significantly more prevalent (2.91 vs 2.01 per 100,000 inhabitants) in Switzerland than in England and Wales [1] (http://www.interpol.int/Public/Statisti ... nd2002.pdf) [2] (http://www.interpol.int/Public/Statisti ... es2002.pdf). This would seem to indicate a positive correlation between gun ownership and crime. Such a comparison between only two countries, however, is quite meaningless: many other factors may come into play except for firearm legislation. As an element of comparison, in 2001 the homicide rate for the United States of America was 5.91 per 100,000 [3] (http://www.interpol.int/Public/Statisti ... sa2001.pdf)."<br /> <br /> Don't forget the following either: when the cops bust a gang, if they have illegal weapons, at least they can charge them with something. If all guns are legal, the only thing they can do is apologize. Food for thought.

[Brent Swain]

Switzerland, with a much higher gun ownership rate than the US still has a much lower homocide rate.How many of them are gun homicides? How does changing the choice of weapon make any of the victims any less dead? The Canadian Government has just declared the Tamil Tigers organization illegal and anyone supporting them financially or otherwise is committing a criminal offence, yet this is not the case with Hells Angels or other clearly criminal gangs in Canada. Why not? It appears that movement in this direction would be a far more effective way of dealing with criminal gangs and focusing limited police resources on those who clearly are criminals rather than spreading their efforts extremely thinly by imposing their efforts on anyone who choses to live in rural areas and posses the tools for doing so.Its like suggesting we lock everybody up in the hope that we will lock up a few criminals in the process. <br /> I heard that 8 bikers were shot in Ontario. I wonder if ther guns were registered . Another prevention victory for the registry? I heard that the police are trying to find out who did it so they can nominate them for the Order of Canada.<br /> Brent

[Dr Caleb]

[QUOTE BY= badsector]<br /> Don't forget the following either: when the cops bust a gang, if they have illegal weapons, at least they can charge them with something. If all guns are legal, the only thing they can do is apologize. Food for thought.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Who said anything (yet again) about making it legal to carry a gun? Although statistics show that is exactally what should happen, there are many people I know that I wouldn't feel safe if they were 'packing'.<br /> <br /> It it only legal to be in posession of a gun, in public, if you are going to or coming from a firing range. Has been since the 70's at least. If the cops bust a gang, and they are in possesition of an unregistered handgun, it still illegal. Just like it has been since the 1930's. I mean, seroiusly, how many times do I have to repeat that, until you actually read it?<br /> <br /> [QUOTE BY= Brent Swain] <br /> I heard that 8 bikers were shot in Ontario. I wonder if ther guns were registered . Another prevention victory for the registry?<br /> Brent[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Does anyone see how these two are related? Making hand guns illegal will not prevent gangs from having them.<br /> <br /> Four RCMP officers were killed last year with an H&K model 92. It's a 'long' gun, shorter than a .22 rifle, but longer than a handgun. It is totally illegal to buy, sell or posess in Canada.<br /> <br /> But that crazy still had one. How will making it illegal to posess a handgun keep handguns off the street? It won't. It was illegal to be in possession of an H&K 92, but 4 RCMP officers were still killed with one.<br />

[Brent Swain]

The reason cops are having trouble busting gangs is precisely because billions of dollars that could have gone to more manpower for them has been squandered on the gun registry. Most cops on the street( excluding their desk warming bosses) will tell you that. Thus the gun registry has led to an increase in gun crime, by undermining the cops ability to enforce and properly investigate violations of exiesting laws. An evidence bases solution is the only one that makes any sense and no money should be squandered on that which the evidence doesn't support.<br /> Brent

[Brent Swain]

Supporters of the gun registry like to quote the number of times police accessed the gun registry for justification of such a huge expense and waste. What they did was rig all police computers, so that every time they punched in any address it would automatically access the gun registry, to increase the numbers and thus the justification for it's existence. If cops were required to specifically connect to the registry, few would have bothered , given it's 91% error rate.<br /> If they wanted to cook the books that way, they could have simply connected their computers to the cash registers of every donut shop in the country, so that every time a cop used his expense account to buy a donut , it would register as a use of the gun registry. The resulting figures would have had the same credibility as the numbers they use to justfy the registry now.<br /> When you have to lie in such ways to justify anything, it is obviously unjustifiable .<br /> Brent

[badsector]

[QUOTE]Supporters of the gun registry like to quote the number of times police accessed the gun registry for justification of such a huge expense and waste.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Policing costs money. Should the police be disbanded because of it? Maybe in your World yes, in mine no.

[Brent Swain]

They wasted enough on the gun registry to hire 2,000 full time cops, yet gunfights in the streets of our cities have become far more commonplace than they were previously , more homeless are freezing to death in our cities and crimes of economic desperation are up. The question is which are the more efective ways to invest the money. Spending should be evidence based rather than paranoia based . Following the proven less effective use for the money is a huge waste, and a drain on more effective options.

[badsector]

Perhaps if the NRA didn't smuggle weapons into Canada in order to destabilize the country we wouldn't have that many gun crimes. Having said that, the US has a gun crime rate roughly 8 times ours.

[Frenchy]

The NRA smuggling guns??? Badsector how did you come to that conclusion, and have you any stats to back that I suspect statement up??? Have a look at the Toronto Star and you will see that the major drug smuggler is an American who is presently incarcerated. You like to brag about Facts, let's see you produce the facts that the NRA is smuggling firearms into Canada! I'm waiting anxiously for you to come up with these FACTS. Regards, Frenchy

[Dr Caleb]

[QUOTE BY= frenchy] The NRA smuggling guns??? Badsector how did you come to that conclusion, and have you any stats to back that I suspect statement up???[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> ROFLMAO!

[Brent Swain]

8 times the gun crime and ten times the population, despit Rambo and John Wayne being considered heroes..<br /> Switzerland has a higher gun ownership rate and a fraction the gun crime. Training in safe gun use and good values are the difference. Without that we can make all the laws we want and it won't change anything.<br /> Brent

[Brent Swain]

I just heard a CBC radio interview with Former General and now senator Romeo Dalaire. He said that when the Canadian Military is finished with their guns, they sell them on the world market, where they find their way into the hands of child soldiers, who are often orderd to kill their own parents, siblings , or other family members, or be killed themselves on the spot. Adding to the world glut of military arms has reduced the price to around $3 per gun. He said it would be a small expense for the Canadian military to simply melt the guns down and absorb the cost, a tiny fraction the cost of the civilian gun registry.
Can there be anything more abysmally hippocritical than a government spending billions on trying vainly to control innocent civilian gun ownership, controlling guns that are extremely unlikily to kill anyone , while supplying child soldiers in third world countries with a steady supply of guns that are guaranteed to kill tens of thousands of innocent people? It's hard to imaging any greater hippocrites than those who cheer on the gun registry while saying nothing about the need for the government to control the guns they sell on the world market, to end up in the hands of child soldiers.
Do we need gun control? Absolutely, the control of military guns , not gopher shooters, and hunting rifles.
Brent