[uwish]

well, don't forget it isn't just the licensing part. It makes simple possession of a firearm a criminal offence even with no criminal intent (without a PAL or POL). Plus, C-68 introduces all the reverse onus and search and seizure powers which are unconstitutional.

So, I agree an 'updated' digital FAC type system would be fantastic as long as all remaining bs of the act is also thrown out.

[Bodah]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

It's a good question QBC.

The whole thing has been handled very badly. The old system didn't get any information out to the police on the beat. But surely that could have been done if they had just upgraded the FAC system, added in the training portion and tweaked a few other bits to make it do-able?

And that's why the Chiefs of police endorse the gun registy. The GR is a federal program not a provincial/municipal one.

When a tool is free it always bodes well come budget time.

Even with the tool, would it be safe to assume you prepare for the worse and hope for the best when you answer a domestic dispute call no matter the result of a gun registry check ?

[EyeBrock]

Sure Bodah, domestics are pretty dicey without guns and the guys are well wary attending these calls.

But once the bad guy has been locked up, it's nice to know that he has several weapons at home or at the cottage. Since a few victims of domestics have been shot with lawfully owned firearms, the government has seen fit to ensure that the cops sieze these weapons.

Sometimes the wives are not aware of all the guns the accused has so the LGR is useful in making sure these firearms are not used once the bad guy gets out on bail.

[Bodah]

One thing that should be repeated is that the catalyst for the creation of the gun registry was the Polytechnique massacres in Montreal, had the gun registry been in place when Mark Lepine purchase his guns would it of made a difference ?

No.

He went through the FAC at the time in Québec and answered no too all of the, "Have you ever been treated for mental illness?" questions during his part of his fire arm acquisition process.

There still would of been a horrible massacre that day.

[ASLplease]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Sure Bodah, domestics are pretty dicey without guns and the guys are well wary attending these calls.

But once the bad guy has been locked up, it's nice to know that he has several weapons at home or at the cottage. Since a few victims of domestics have been shot with lawfully owned firearms, the government has seen fit to ensure that the cops sieze these weapons.

Sometimes the wives are not aware of all the guns the accused has so the LGR is useful in making sure these firearms are not used once the bad guy gets out on bail.

because bad guys always insist on getting their rifles from legal channels, right?

[EyeBrock]

You can't stop the lone idiot gunman with a database.

What you can do is make sure weapons that are legally owned by somebody who has been charged with a violent offence can't get their guns until the courts say so. That's not a bad thing.


Asl, Sure, illegal guns are out there but there are way more registered guns used to kill wives and cops than illegal guns.

[Bodah]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

But once the bad guy has been locked up, it's nice to know that he has several weapons at home or at the cottage. Since a few victims of domestics have been shot with lawfully owned firearms, the government has seen fit to ensure that the cops sieze these weapons.

Wasn't that system already in place prior to 1989 ? I think the only difference is that with the GR it is now availble electronically in your squad car ?

There must of been some form of data collection prior to 89 when dealing with the sales of firearms ?

Is this a speed of information can save lives issue ? I honestly don't know.

[EyeBrock]

Bodah Bodah:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

But once the bad guy has been locked up, it's nice to know that he has several weapons at home or at the cottage. Since a few victims of domestics have been shot with lawfully owned firearms, the government has seen fit to ensure that the cops sieze these weapons.

Wasn't that system already in place prior to 1989 ? I think the only difference is that with the GR it is now availble electronically in your squad car ?

There must of been some form of data collection prior to 89 when dealing with the sales of firearms ?

Is this a speed of information can save lives issue ? I honestly don't know.

The link to the FAC database was non-existent. Even the first five or so years of the LGR no data was transferred to the cops.

Then there was a 'nether region' of slow data entry where it took months for a registered firearm to actually make it to the database which was just as useless.

Since Harper's demons and devils got in, the database is much more accurate and updated quickly.

It's now really at the peak of it's usefulness to police.

All those years on and all that cash wasted. I know it was an election platform for the Tories but it’s actually doing a decent job now.

[ASLplease]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

You can't stop the lone idiot gunman with a database.

What you can do is make sure weapons that are legally owned by somebody who has been charged with a violent offence can't get their guns until the courts say so. That's not a bad thing.


Asl, Sure, illegal guns are out there but there are way more registered guns used to kill wives and cops than illegal guns.

Eyebrock, no matter how much we disagree with each other, I just wanted to say that I dont want violent offenders to have guns either , and I dont want wives or cops shot either.

But I would really like to see a quote in the media that goes something like this: " Police are using the registry to take away thousands of inapropriately owned long guns per year, and we are happy to tell you that it is starting to make difference... Seven percent of Canada's homicides caused by firearms are registered long guns, which is about 10 homicides per year. I am happy to say that the proof is in the pudding, we have reduced the 10 murders to 5 murders"

That type of claim would really seal your case, even for me.

[EyeBrock]

ASLplease ASLplease:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

You can't stop the lone idiot gunman with a database.

What you can do is make sure weapons that are legally owned by somebody who has been charged with a violent offence can't get their guns until the courts say so. That's not a bad thing.


Asl, Sure, illegal guns are out there but there are way more registered guns used to kill wives and cops than illegal guns.

Eyebrock, no matter how much we disagree with each other, I just wanted to say that I dont want violent offenders to have guns either , and I dont want wives or cops shot either.

But I would really like to see a quote in the media that goes something like this: " Police are using the registry to take away thousands of inapropriately owned long guns per year, and we are happy to tell you that it is starting to make difference... Seven percent of Canada's homicides caused by firearms are registered long guns, which is about 10 homicides per year. I am happy to say that the proof is in the pudding, we have reduced the 10 murders to 5 murders"

That type of claim would really seal your case, even for me.

If you take it so literally, I know personally of at least 50+ weapons seizures in my area after domestic assaults. I would think across Canada similar such seizures are in the thousands anually.
I suppose you could trawl through the thousands of 'reports to a justice' to confirm my assessment.

I'd say that each weapons seizure is a woman’s life saved.

[ASLplease]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

If you take it so literally, I know personally of at least 50+ weapons seizures in my area after domestic assaults. I would think across Canada similar such seizures are in the thousands anually.

I think its great that your seizing these "weapons" but unless it translates into a reduced rate, then you haven't successfully defended your assertion that the registry is useful.

$1:

I suppose you could trawl through the thousands of 'reports to a justice' to confirm my assessment.

no need to, stat can has trended some of the raw data for years

$1:

I'd say that each weapons seizure is a woman’s life saved.

No doubt that police officers are saving lives, my question is what was it before you had the registry as a tool, and what is it now that you have the registry as a tool?

If you can show me that the 10 deaths by registered long guns is now 5, or maybe even 9, then I will forever change my tune. I will become an advocate for the registry, and I will shift my focus towards protecting legitimate uses of firearms in a society that INCLUDES a registry.

[ASLplease]

Eyebrock, a lot of seemingly good ideas fail to acomplish anything. a few years back Calgary decided that they could really make a difference with type 2 diabetes if the funded the costs for blood glucose strips....more people testing, more empowered to manage their condition, right? well, it was wrong. When they went looking for proof in the pudding.....there was none. they was no measureable advantage to providing the extra funding. So was the government wrong to scrap the idea and move onto other ideas that might work? I dont think so. I'm all for progress, not sitting in 1 spot spinning our wheels.

[EyeBrock]

Your not for convincing ASL. We'll leave it at that.

[Scape]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

You can't stop the lone idiot gunman with a database.

What you can do is make sure weapons that are legally owned by somebody who has been charged with a violent offence can't get their guns until the courts say so. That's not a bad thing.


Asl, Sure, illegal guns are out there but there are way more registered guns used to kill wives and cops than illegal guns.

That's a good point. Criminals don't plan on being criminals after all. There is always the argument that a criminal can always get a gun but that doesn't take into account someone who is law abiding and then breaks the law.

[ASLplease]

Scape Scape:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

You can't stop the lone idiot gunman with a database.

What you can do is make sure weapons that are legally owned by somebody who has been charged with a violent offence can't get their guns until the courts say so. That's not a bad thing.


Asl, Sure, illegal guns are out there but there are way more registered guns used to kill wives and cops than illegal guns.

That's a good point. Criminals don't plan on being criminals after all. There is always the argument that a criminal can always get a gun but that doesn't take into account someone who is law abiding and then breaks the law.

you have failed to establish that this is a good point unless the outcome supports your assertion. at the end of the day, our actual rates collected by stats can shows us the outcome, with no change in outcome, there is no accounting for the things that matter.