About.... Face!

[George Jung]

Anybody catch this? Maybe our Northern Neighbors can offer a counter-point?

Despite spending a whopping $2.7 billion on creating and running a long-gun registry, Canadians never reaped any benefits from the project. The legislation to end the program finally passed the Parliament on Wednesday. Even though the country started registering long guns in 1998, the registry never solved a single murder. Instead it has been an enormous waste of police officers’ time, diverting their efforts from patrolling Canadian streets and doing traditional policing activities.
Gun-control advocates have long claimed that registration is a safety issue, and their reasoning is straightforward: If a gun has been left at a crime scene and it was registered to the person who committed the crime, the registry will link the crime gun back to the criminal.
Nice logic, but reality never worked that way. Crime guns are very rarely left at the crime scene, and when they are left at the scene, they have not been registered — criminals are not stupid enough to leave behind a gun that’s registered to them. Even in the few cases where registered crime guns are left at the scene, it is usually because the criminal has been seriously injured or killed, so these crimes would have been solved even without registration.The statistics speak for themselves. From 2003 to 2009, there were 4,257 homicides in Canada, 1,314 of which were committed with firearms. Data provided last fall by the Library of Parliament reveals that the weapon was identified in fewer than a third of the homicides with firearms, and that about three-quarters of the identified weapons were not registered. Of the weapons that were registered, about half were registered to someone other than the person accused of the homicide. In just 62 cases — that is, only 4.7 percent of all firearm homicides — was the gun registered to the accused. As most homicides in Canada are not committed with a gun, the 62 cases correspond to only about 1 percent of all homicides.
To repeat, during these seven years, there were only 62 cases — nine a year — where it was even conceivable that registration made a difference. But apparently, the registry was not important even in those cases. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Chiefs of Police have not yet provided a single example in which tracing was of more than peripheral importance in solving a case.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...john-r-lott-jr

[Phillip Allen]

oh boy, oh boy, oh boy...

[bob winter]

One important thing not brought up above is the question of handguns used in homicides, as opposed to long guns. Handguns have been subject to strict registration requirements for years, long before anybody even thought about registering long guns. However, I would be willing to bet that a good proportion of handguns used in crimes were brought into the country illegally and there never was an intent to register them.

The long gun registry has been a source of considerable debate ever since it came on the scene. For people living in rural areas, it makes absolutely no sense and was regarded as just another form of government meddling in people's affairs. I never did register my long guns, and never had any intention of doing so, and I think the demise of the registry is a good thing. I am sure there are some who disagree with me.

[Phillip Allen]

One important thing not brought up above is the question of handguns used in homicides, as opposed to long guns. Handguns have been subject to strict registration requirements for years, long before anybody even thought about registering long guns. However, I would be willing to bet that a good proportion of handguns used in crimes were brought into the country illegally and there never was an intent to register them.

The long gun registry has been a source of considerable debate ever since it came on the scene. For people living in rural areas, it makes absolutely no sense and was regarded as just another form of government meddling in people's affairs. I never did register my long guns, and never had any intention of doing so, and I think the demise of the registry is a good thing. I am sure there are some who disagree with me.

do the people who voted for it get to pay the government back out of their personal assets?

[George Jung]

The article discussed that a bit, Bob - noting the homicide rate included long-gun and handgun. Not sure they differentiated it further.

One thing surprised me - that guns were involved in only approximately 25% of your murders. How are you folk killing each other off? Bludgeoning? Knives? Cold exposure?

[Donn]

How are you folk killing each other off? Bludgeoning? Knives? Cold exposure?

Severe beer rationing and prolonged exposure to PMJ.

[George Jung]

That would come under Cruel and inhumane, I do believe (and in that order...)

[bob winter]

Of course not, Phillip. To begin with, nobody ever actually voted for or against the registry as such. A direct vote on anything is extremely rare. About the only direct voting I can recall off the top of my head in recent history had to do with Quebec separation and that was a Provincial matter.

Also, the registry pales in comparison to some things that have gone on.

[Phillip Allen]

Of course not, Phillip. To begin with, nobody ever actually voted for or against the registry as such. A direct vote on anything is extremely rare. About the only direct voting I can recall off the top of my head in recent history had to do with Quebec separation and that was a Provincial matter.

Also, the registry pales in comparison to some things that have gone on.

well, who was it that spent all that money then?

[bob winter]

As I recall the LGR was brought in buy the Liberals under Chretien. Once it was set up, it had to be funded so it would have been provided for in the government budget. As long as it existed, it had to be funded, and this would have taken place under Harper's watch since he came to office. So, now that it is gone, funding will cease, I would presume.

[Phillip Allen]

As I recall the LGR was brought in buy the Liberals under Chretien. Once it was set up, it had to be funded so it would have been provided for in the government budget. As long as it existed, it had to be funded, and this would have taken place under Harper's watch since he came to office. So, now that it is gone, funding will cease, I would presume.

it'll be a profit loss for printing contractors

[George Jung]

I was discussing this topic with SWMBO at lunch, her question - Why did it cost $4 billion over 7 years? I suspect it created a lot of new government positions/departments, and the like.
With that in mind, do those depts/jobs disappear, or simply continue?

[Ron Williamson]

The Liberals brought it in to help quell fears about "assault rifles" that were used in some high profile shooting sprees.The problems they had stemmed from the obstinacy of the sheeple,who refused to register.
I registered and so did plenty of others,especially hunters.IIRC, a guy was required to carry the registry as well as a license,while hunting.We were also required to show the possession/acquisition certificate before buying ammo.I assume that info was kept as a reference as to see if you were buying ammo that matched your registry
To me,the whole system was pretty painless,but I never tried to buy/sell/transfer any gun.I understand that process was awkward and tiresome.


Since the Conservatives got themselves into government they've been itching to kill it,but couldn't without a majority,which they now have.
R

[George Jung]

Do you consider this a loss?

[bob winter]

Interesting question. I really have no idea at the moment. Normally, the process would be to attempt to redeploy the staff involved by placing them elsewhere in the public service. However, since the government is about to eliminate something like 45,000 positions, I think it is, doing so may be a bit of an issue in practical terms. Also, I am not sure if the registry was part of a government department or a Crown corporation and that will have some impact as well.

As to why it cost so much, maybe somebody with a better handle on it than I have can venture an opinion.

[Ron Williamson]

I don't consider it a loss.
There's plenty of government waste.This is like spitting into Niagara Falls.
R

[George Jung]

I'm impressed that the decision to abort the program apparently was made quickly, objectively, and with little objection or fanfare. I didn't know that was possible!

BTW, again - what means do you folk employ to bump each other off?

[Donn]

BTW, again - what means do you folk employ to bump each other off?

PPV

[Ron Williamson]

Here's a link from Statistics Canada.
Near the bottom is an overview of the firearms law.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-.../10518-eng.htm

Stabbing,if I read it correctly,is our method of choice.
R

[Ron Williamson]

PPV

Pay per View?
R

[TomF]

I'm impressed that the decision to abort the program apparently was made quickly, objectively, and with little objection or fanfare. I didn't know that was possible!

BTW, again - what means do you folk employ to bump each other off?

Actually, the decision was made long before the current government got their majority - it's been a plank in the Conservative platform for as long as the registry existed, and a matter of heated tempers and rhetoric, for a couple of election campaigns. The fact that it passed the House without much of a burp shows fatigue, and the opposition parties picking their battles, rather than agreement. A bill to kill registry was introduced in the last (minority) Parliament, and didn't get the needed support.

The National Review article tells only one part of the story. What it doesn't describe is the degree of urban/rural split in support for the long gun registry - and that a whole lot of the electoral support for eradicating the registry comes ... from rural areas where the Conservatives are strongest. Nor does the article describe except by an oblique reference the fact that Police chiefs and the RCMP have been publicly pleading for years for this registry to be maintained - because in their opinion, it keeps their officers safer. Nor that a related issue arose respecting the data stored in the registry itself. A number of advocates asked that the existing information be retained in some form - including a couple of provinces (e.g. Quebec) interested in exploring starting a registry of their own, for their own population. The request was flatly turned down - the Conservatives not only want the Registry stopped, but they want it to be virtually impossible to re-start, or to have the existing longitudinal data available for research or other purposes.

Understand, George, that the National Review is written for a particular niche - and its interest is served by presenting the policy decision here as it did.

How do Canadians kill each other? Well, if there's a firearm in the house, you're 6X more likely to be killed with it than with anything else. Of course, we prolly won't be able now to track change in that statistic over time, now that the registry's gone. But IIRC most murders are committed with kitchen knives ... reflecting the fact that most people who murder each other are spouses or common-law partners.

Is it a loss? Well, the registry's workforce was based in Miramichi, not in Ottawa. There's some word that the workers will have some other location-neutral task sent to the town, but the loss of jobs in an already seriously depressed place (fish, forest products) is major. There's a reason why the administration was set up in Miramichi in the first place, rather than in Ottawa.

[Gib Etheridge]

I just got a notice from the RCMP that it's time to renew my registrations. No charge, just a new passport photo.

[Peter Malcolm Jardine]

Severe beer rationing and prolonged exposure to PMJ.

Donn doesn't know very many Canadians. I am about the middle of the political spectrum up here.

The long gun registry was a huge bureaucratic mess, and Stevie Harper and his western power base long ago said they would scrap it. Ho hum, someone else will bring back another brick in the gun control wall sometime soon. We are pretty anti gun up here, and no wonder, we have you guys to observe.

[Phillip Allen]

Donn doesn't know very many Canadians. I am about the middle of the political spectrum up here.

The long gun registry was a huge bureaucratic mess, and Stevie Harper and his western power base long ago said they would scrap it. Ho hum, someone else will bring back another brick in the gun control wall sometime soon. We are pretty anti gun up here, and no wonder, we have you guys to observe.

only the townies

[Donn]

Donn doesn't know very many Canadians. I am about the middle of the political spectrum up here.

My comment had nothing to do with politics.

[Phillip Allen]

My comment had nothing to do with politics.

that would be Polly-tics

[Old Dryfoot]

Have not had a chance to read the thread yet, but the Saanich Police, the community that I live in, are attributing this arrest to the Long Gun Registry.

Long-gun registry helps bust Saanich man who embezzled 159 firearms


Saanich police Sgt. Dean Jantzen sits with a replica M16 Bushmaster propped up on the table in front of him. The assault rifle and another 158 guns were seized by police from the home of man, employed as a manager at Island Outfitters, who was allegedly taking the weapons from work.

The full story can be viewed here.

[Donn]

Have not had a chance to read the thread yet, but the Saanich Police, the community that I live in, are attributing this arrest to the Long Gun Registry.

What??? Didn't that guy know Canadians are "pretty anti-gun?"

[Phillip Allen]

he stole them and THEN regestered them???

[Peter Malcolm Jardine]

only the townies

Look at our electoral map. You will find the "townies" make up the majority of seats in our parliament. We elect our government up here, and we tell them we don't like guns. Quite simple.

[Donn]

Most of the Canadians I know aren't townies. They're more rural, and all have something to do with fishing. They usually have guns nearby.

[Old Dryfoot]

he stole them and THEN regestered them???

No one said he was smart.

[Old Dryfoot]

What??? Didn't that guy know Canadians are "pretty anti-gun?"

I don't know about anti-gun, I wouldn't say that I'm anti-gun. I actually quite enjoy shooting, but I do think that there are reasonable limits as to the types of firearms a private citizen should have access to.

I don't really have an opinion one way or the other on the LGR, I do however doubt the figures the press is being fed as to the cost of the program. If I am ever a gun owner again, and asked to register, I would have no problem doing so. I think that all handguns should be registered, period.

[TomF]

Lotsa rural Canadians hunt, fewer urban ones do. And there are a lot more urban Canadians.

In cities, deer are comparatively scarce, but crime dramas show gunfights every hour. So urbanites seem to think that guns in cities are more likely to be pointed at people than at deer - whether or not that's actually true is an interesting side discussion. But as urbanites would rather not have guns pointed at them, they tend to be more about gun control than their rural neighbours.

It's really not rocket science. And as we've not has a 2nd Amendment ensuring lots of handguns in circulation, most of our small-time criminals aren't packing (though that's changing, thanks to smuggling from the US), so there's not been a big incentive to abandon our traditional reluctance to using guns for self defence.

[Captain Intrepid]

I wouldn't call Canada "anti-gun". What Canada is though, is generally against the idea you need a gun for self defence or defence of property. Hence the restrictions on owning handguns and the virtually complete ban on carrying a concealed handgun.

I had no problem with the registry. There was certainly room for improvement to minimize the effects on trappers and farmers, but it wasn't a bad thing.

[TomF]

And if one ever took the time to read the financial statements, the big expense was a wild underestimation of the price of starting the whole thing up. Once you wrote off those sunk costs as indeed "sunk" and irrecoverable, you saw that the actual year-over-year operating expenses were as efficient as any other fairly small Government registry service.

[Ron Williamson]

What Canada is though, is generally against the idea you need a gun for self defence or defence of property.

Tools are good,weapons are not.
I know a guy who was charged and convicted for assault with a scrap of broom handle,which was confiscated.The police let him keep the hunting knife that they found in his truck.
R

[Phillip Allen]

I remember going on an ambulace call once... they wheeled the loser out with about 8" of broken pool cue sticking out of his sternum (the idiot still wanted to fight)

[TomF]

That's one of the reasons we don't have laws about knife blade length up here - the distinction that tools can be used as weapons, and what one might often called a weapon is often a legitimate, non-human-violence oriented tool.

I'm fine with that. My kukri's great for yard work ... and I've no need to carry a baseball bat to a protest rally.

[Captain Intrepid]

I can't think of anyone who has a gun to protect them "from the criminals". Everyone I know uses em for range shooting, hunting, or in rare cases protection from wild animals (read polar bears). One of these days I'd like to pick up a Lee Enfield 303, put a few hundred rounds through it and learn to hunt deer.

[George Jung]

Our local rag had a story about a good samaritan stopping to help a stranded motorist, and getting robbed. Almost unheard of until a few years ago. A local forum discussed this, it was an eye-opener. All but one poster noted 1)they wouldn't stop 'unless packing' 2) they'd all call 911, report the folks in need.

I was surprised the number of posters who said they carry concealed.

[ljb5]

It's possible that the low rate of gun violence is related to the deterrent effect of the registry.

[BrianW]

only the townies

Which is why such invasive laws are best made at local levels. Then those that don't like them can move.

[Captain Intrepid]

Which is why such invasive laws are best made at local levels. Then those that don't like them can move.

Or have provisions for the situation of minority groups. Plus it's not really an invasive law, more just a pain for those who use gun a lot.

It's possible that the low rate of gun violence is related to the deterrent effect of the registry.

I doubt it's due to the gun registry. I think it's parly about accessibility, partly about ease, and partly cultural. If weapons are readably available they'll be used in the heat of passion more, and if they don't require a great deal of commitment from the wielder I imagine people are more likely to use them. It's one thing to get in someone's face and personally plunge a knife into their chest, it's another thing to stand 10 feet away and squeeze a metal crescent.

The registry I tend to think of more for the sake of the RCMP. If they know there's a weapon in a house, they can take precautions they otherwise wouldn't, perhaps being even more cautious than normal in terms of backing off before situations escalate.

[Phillip Allen]

It's possible that the low rate of gun violence is related to the deterrent effect of the registry.

are you suggesting that possibility is equal to probability?

[Ron Williamson]

There has been a low level of gun violence for much longer than there has been a long gun registry.
Much tighter controls on handguns are likely the reason,but what do I know?
R

[TomF]

What Ron said. While we've never had a terribly high rate of gun violence, we've had a fairly large number of hunting weapons in circulation for a very long time.

Folks who've tried to parse these things talk about the difference in political culture between Canada and the US from the time of your revolution. While both countries shared a history of hunting, Canada pretty much explicitly rejected the individual right to use firearms for self protection - whereas the US embraced it. Our iconic historical heroes were first fur traders and voyageurs ... and later, the Mounties. Quite a distance from Davey Crocket, cowboys and the James Gang.

Our countries' political cultures - and our approaches to any number of things from entrepreneurialism to health care to firearms - have shown those differences.

[Phillip Allen]

What Ron said. While we've never had a terribly high rate of gun violence, we've had a fairly large number of hunting weapons in circulation for a very long time.

Folks who've tried to parse these things talk about the difference in political culture between Canada and the US from the time of your revolution. While both countries shared a history of hunting, Canada pretty much explicitly rejected the individual right to use firearms for self protection - whereas the US embraced it. Our iconic historical heroes were first fur traders and voyageurs ... and later, the Mounties. Quite a distance from Davey Crocket, cowboys and the James Gang.

Our countries' political cultures - and our approaches to any number of things from entrepreneurialism to health care to firearms - have shown those differences.

that's a bit too sophistic for me

[Ron Williamson]

Sophistic is too sophistic for me.
R

[Bob Smalser]

Just let me know when it's safe to send this 1914 Smith revolver back to the British Columbia family whose grandfather carried it in WWI and survived because of it.



Supposedly y'all have a provision that allows these heirlooms to be kept, but of so, this logging family either couldn't figure it out, or were scared off by the provision requiring approval from the local police force. They kept it illegally (felons, no less) for a number of decades, but Mama finally got tired of being afraid of her own government and sent it south for safekeeping.

A damn shame. Especially since .455 Webley hasn't been stocked in your local sporting goods stores for 40 years.