How to cure a federal budget surplus: create a gun registry - the ultimate boondoggle
- Thread starter Bull
- Start date
Penhold..
We are both in agreement. We need to toughen the laws in Canada for storage, transport and use of guns. How we should accomplish that has yet to be determind. --- Kev
What i'm hereing about ballistically fingerprint a gun is just over the top. If this were possible does anyone have a clue what it would cost? We went from $85,000,000 to $1.4 billion with a gun registry and some of you want to burden the taxpayers more. How many lives would be saved or crimes solved if we had this technology? Not enough to warrant that kind of expenditure.....and don't start crying about "what is a life worth?" If the goverment was so keen on saving and preserving lives we would have the best equipment for our soldiers instead of the out dated crap they're forced to use.
I have not seen any data that has proven that the gun registry is working. Have any of you?
The gun registry is a joke and should be scrapped. We need better education for gun owners, especially new gun owners. The course we have in Canada is a joke. When i went for my Firearms Licence the instructor gave me the answers. He was proud that no one had ever failed his course.
Some of the laws we have in Canada towards firearms i support. You can't have handgun with a barrel length shorter than 4" or a handgun with a caliber of .28 or .32. This is good because these are the weapons of choose with criminals. There small, and can be concealed and drawn out quickly. To carry a .45 unholstered is pretty uncomfortabe.
What i hate is i can't go out to the bush and shoot a handgun. A rifle and shotgun yes (with a hunting licence) but not a handgun. The only place you can shoot a handgun is at shooting range. This pisses me off to know end. --- Kev
We are both in agreement. We need to toughen the laws in Canada for storage, transport and use of guns. How we should accomplish that has yet to be determind. --- Kev
What i'm hereing about ballistically fingerprint a gun is just over the top. If this were possible does anyone have a clue what it would cost? We went from $85,000,000 to $1.4 billion with a gun registry and some of you want to burden the taxpayers more. How many lives would be saved or crimes solved if we had this technology? Not enough to warrant that kind of expenditure.....and don't start crying about "what is a life worth?" If the goverment was so keen on saving and preserving lives we would have the best equipment for our soldiers instead of the out dated crap they're forced to use.
I have not seen any data that has proven that the gun registry is working. Have any of you?
The gun registry is a joke and should be scrapped. We need better education for gun owners, especially new gun owners. The course we have in Canada is a joke. When i went for my Firearms Licence the instructor gave me the answers. He was proud that no one had ever failed his course.
Some of the laws we have in Canada towards firearms i support. You can't have handgun with a barrel length shorter than 4" or a handgun with a caliber of .28 or .32. This is good because these are the weapons of choose with criminals. There small, and can be concealed and drawn out quickly. To carry a .45 unholstered is pretty uncomfortabe.
What i hate is i can't go out to the bush and shoot a handgun. A rifle and shotgun yes (with a hunting licence) but not a handgun. The only place you can shoot a handgun is at shooting range. This pisses me off to know end. --- Kev
A little firearms law history. In the early seventies a law was passed banning the so called "Saturday Night Specials" which were small, easily concealed handguns. Since then, more police officers have been killed in the line of duty by handguns than before the law. These handguns had short barrels, making them very inaccurate, and the small caliber meant people shot with them would usually survive. (Remember the movie Serpico, with Al Pacino. Based on a true story, the real Serpico was shot from less than a foot away in the face with a Saturday Night Special. Last I heard, he's still alive and well.) Crooks just started carrying full size handguns instead.Kev said:
As to the FAC course, I met a RCMP officer in the mid-90's who had just graduated from the Academy. He'd been in the Army before in an infantry battalion. His FAC expired while in training, and he had to take the full course to get it renewed. He was carrying a .38 revolver when told this. I've also heard about a guy who got out of the Army after numerous years as a sniper, and was refused an FAC. Military snipers have to take numerous psychological exams before and after becoming a sniper, so this guy is probably saner than most of us, is more knowledgeable about firearms than the rest of us, and can't get an FAC.
dbrw42 said:
INTERESTING..........INTERESTING...........When you apply for a Firearms and Acquisition licence there is a back ground check and if the goverment finds something that does not meet with their expectations there are a number of variables that can delay or void your application for a licence. To many to get into here, but a criminal record, or mental instabilty are some of the concerns the goverment has.
I've also heard (not substantiated) that if someone was applying for a FAC licence a DUI (for example) may/can delay your application of a FAC licence. It just depends on the person handling your case. --- Kev
I agree. I fully support a gun registry, and any other means that could thwart criminals of there actions. This ballistic fingerprinting maybe an excellant idea. But at what cost to us? Personally i think we've paid enough, and to add to the burden with other programs that may or may not work......i don' feel its justified.Grendleaxe said:
The FBI is on top of cutting edge technology in its attempt at stopping criminals. Do they use this ballistic fingerprinting? --- Kev
Since some posters seem to believe that tracking technology is the end all be all solution to our societal problems, I’d like to expand on other items we should apply this “logic” 
to. With legally owned firearms accounting for a very small portion of violent crimes, the question is what do we do with all the other objects that cause so much carnage?
NOTE: This part of the post is to be taken FECECIOUSLY.
AUTOMOBILES:
They cause more injuries and death every year than all firearms, legal and illegal combined. So they should be subjected to at least the same storage and restriction laws as firearms, if not even tougher ones. For starters:
1) They all must be registered. Failure to register will be a criminal code offence.
2) Since we are so fascinated with ballistic finger printing and other new technologies, we should apply some of them to tracking automobiles too. Samples of paint, metal, and tire tread pattern will be taken off all automobiles. This could come in handy to compare with crime scene samples. Since people paint and repair their vehicles and change tires often, samplings will have to be taken 4 times a year. The results will be put into a national database to be accessed by law enforcement in the event it needs to be compared with samples taken from a crime scene.
3) All automobiles will be stored in a safe manner. This shall include at a minimum:
a) No tempered glass. It makes it too easy to break in and steal the vehicle. Owners should consider shatter resistant type glass used by businesses for anti-theft purposes. The only exception will be the windshield, as it needs some give for safety reasons.
b) Door and ignition locks will have an anti-pick system to make it harder to break into the vehicle.
c) Ignition and steering immobilizer systems will be installed and activated, or the steering wheel removed all together.
d) All vehicles will be stored in a secured building not readily broken into, and the contents not visible from the outside.
4) No passenger automobiles will have more than 100 horse power or an acceleration greater than 0 to 100 Km/h in 15 seconds, which ever restricts the automobile the greatest applies. You do not need any more power to transport people in a safe manner. Only people who want to drive in an unsafe manner or evade law enforcement would want more power.
5) All sport type vehicles, or vehicles that look like they can go fast are banned. They look scary and only encourage people with too much testosterone to drive in an unsafe manner.
6) GPS transponders will be installed on every automobile so they can be tracked down at any given time. Those not breaking any laws have nothing to hide or fear.
7) Remote deactivators will be installed on every automobile so any vehicle used as a get away vehicle can be easily stopped by law enforcement. This will eliminate high-speed chases, which usually results in accidents and possibly fatality.
8) Any deliberate attempts to circumvent these safety laws or failure to correct any known non-functional system related to these safety laws in a timely manner shall be an indictable offence under the criminal code.
9) At any time, law enforcement may schedule an inspection at the earliest convenience for the purpose of verifying that owners are in compliance with these safety laws.
10) All costs incurred to comply with these new laws shall be absorbed by the owner of the vehicle. Consider it the cost of ownership. Remember, it is a privilege to own an automobile, NOT a right.
Common items used as weapons:
1) Knives, scissors, and box cutter will have material samples as well as cutting pattern and characteristics taken from each item.
2) Bats, frying pans, and heavy blunt ornaments will have material samples and impact patterns taken from each item.
3) Hand and power tools will have material samples and use patterning taken from each item.
In addition, all items mentioned above will be registered. The latest digital technology will be used for taking and storing of information of the above items. Re-sampling for all items above will be done every month, as patterns change with use. All data will be put into a national database to be accessed by law enforcement in the event it needs to be compared with samples taken from a crime scene. Failure to comply with this law will be a criminal code offence.
Clothing (including footwear):
Since most all criminals commit crimes while clothed, we will also register and take forensic samples of all clothing. A material sample will be taken and analyzed with the new digital technology we have. In addition, re-sampling will be performed once a month. The results will be put into a national database to be accessed by law enforcement in the event it needs to be compared with samples taken from a crime scene. These samples will prove most useful in solving crimes. Small ICs should be implanted into clothing so they can be digitally and quickly scanned and verified for tracking purposes. Tampering with these tracking ICs will be a criminal code offence. The costs of implementation will be passed on to the consumer or owner of the article of clothing.
People:
Since crimes are always committed by a person, everyone shall be registered. With new technology available, a small transmitter with anti-tamper features will be implanted into every citizen. Random checks will verify that the correct transmitter has not been tampered or removed, and is still functioning. Each transmitter will be unique, and a national database will be made available to law enforcement so that any person may be located or tracked down quickly. In addition, any given individual’s location may be tracked at a given time. This will help to greatly narrow down the list of suspects in a criminal investigation, and track down any fleeing criminals. Tampering with these tracking ICs will be a criminal code offence. The costs to implement and maintain these transmitters shall be born by the individual being tracked.
The costs of these and the upcoming massive boon doggles will be minimized by huge user fees and passing on the cost to the owner or citizens. Remember, we are going to the far extremes, without any independent studies or proof that these laws will be efficient, for your own safety and protection. If you are not a criminal, or have no criminal intents, you should be more than happy to comply with these laws to help law enforcement create a safer place.
to. With legally owned firearms accounting for a very small portion of violent crimes, the question is what do we do with all the other objects that cause so much carnage?NOTE: This part of the post is to be taken FECECIOUSLY.
AUTOMOBILES:
They cause more injuries and death every year than all firearms, legal and illegal combined. So they should be subjected to at least the same storage and restriction laws as firearms, if not even tougher ones. For starters:
1) They all must be registered. Failure to register will be a criminal code offence.
2) Since we are so fascinated with ballistic finger printing and other new technologies, we should apply some of them to tracking automobiles too. Samples of paint, metal, and tire tread pattern will be taken off all automobiles. This could come in handy to compare with crime scene samples. Since people paint and repair their vehicles and change tires often, samplings will have to be taken 4 times a year. The results will be put into a national database to be accessed by law enforcement in the event it needs to be compared with samples taken from a crime scene.
3) All automobiles will be stored in a safe manner. This shall include at a minimum:
a) No tempered glass. It makes it too easy to break in and steal the vehicle. Owners should consider shatter resistant type glass used by businesses for anti-theft purposes. The only exception will be the windshield, as it needs some give for safety reasons.
b) Door and ignition locks will have an anti-pick system to make it harder to break into the vehicle.
c) Ignition and steering immobilizer systems will be installed and activated, or the steering wheel removed all together.
d) All vehicles will be stored in a secured building not readily broken into, and the contents not visible from the outside.
4) No passenger automobiles will have more than 100 horse power or an acceleration greater than 0 to 100 Km/h in 15 seconds, which ever restricts the automobile the greatest applies. You do not need any more power to transport people in a safe manner. Only people who want to drive in an unsafe manner or evade law enforcement would want more power.
5) All sport type vehicles, or vehicles that look like they can go fast are banned. They look scary and only encourage people with too much testosterone to drive in an unsafe manner.
6) GPS transponders will be installed on every automobile so they can be tracked down at any given time. Those not breaking any laws have nothing to hide or fear.
7) Remote deactivators will be installed on every automobile so any vehicle used as a get away vehicle can be easily stopped by law enforcement. This will eliminate high-speed chases, which usually results in accidents and possibly fatality.
8) Any deliberate attempts to circumvent these safety laws or failure to correct any known non-functional system related to these safety laws in a timely manner shall be an indictable offence under the criminal code.
9) At any time, law enforcement may schedule an inspection at the earliest convenience for the purpose of verifying that owners are in compliance with these safety laws.
10) All costs incurred to comply with these new laws shall be absorbed by the owner of the vehicle. Consider it the cost of ownership. Remember, it is a privilege to own an automobile, NOT a right.
Common items used as weapons:
1) Knives, scissors, and box cutter will have material samples as well as cutting pattern and characteristics taken from each item.
2) Bats, frying pans, and heavy blunt ornaments will have material samples and impact patterns taken from each item.
3) Hand and power tools will have material samples and use patterning taken from each item.
In addition, all items mentioned above will be registered. The latest digital technology will be used for taking and storing of information of the above items. Re-sampling for all items above will be done every month, as patterns change with use. All data will be put into a national database to be accessed by law enforcement in the event it needs to be compared with samples taken from a crime scene. Failure to comply with this law will be a criminal code offence.
Clothing (including footwear):
Since most all criminals commit crimes while clothed, we will also register and take forensic samples of all clothing. A material sample will be taken and analyzed with the new digital technology we have. In addition, re-sampling will be performed once a month. The results will be put into a national database to be accessed by law enforcement in the event it needs to be compared with samples taken from a crime scene. These samples will prove most useful in solving crimes. Small ICs should be implanted into clothing so they can be digitally and quickly scanned and verified for tracking purposes. Tampering with these tracking ICs will be a criminal code offence. The costs of implementation will be passed on to the consumer or owner of the article of clothing.
People:
Since crimes are always committed by a person, everyone shall be registered. With new technology available, a small transmitter with anti-tamper features will be implanted into every citizen. Random checks will verify that the correct transmitter has not been tampered or removed, and is still functioning. Each transmitter will be unique, and a national database will be made available to law enforcement so that any person may be located or tracked down quickly. In addition, any given individual’s location may be tracked at a given time. This will help to greatly narrow down the list of suspects in a criminal investigation, and track down any fleeing criminals. Tampering with these tracking ICs will be a criminal code offence. The costs to implement and maintain these transmitters shall be born by the individual being tracked.
The costs of these and the upcoming massive boon doggles will be minimized by huge user fees and passing on the cost to the owner or citizens. Remember, we are going to the far extremes, without any independent studies or proof that these laws will be efficient, for your own safety and protection. If you are not a criminal, or have no criminal intents, you should be more than happy to comply with these laws to help law enforcement create a safer place.
MP sets sights on registry
Bid to stop gun program's funding divides Liberals
Bill Curry
CanWest News Service
Monday, December 06, 2004
OTTAWA - A Liberal MP, once a loyal supporter of Paul Martin, is taking on his own fragile government in an effort to stop the flow of money to the gun registry.
In the biggest test of the Liberal minority since the Throne Speech vote on Oct. 7, Sarnia-Lambton MP Roger Gallaway's motion would scrap a $97-million payment to the Canadian Firearms Centre, essentially killing the program.
All 99 Conservative MPs are expected to support Mr. Gallaway, while the 54 Bloc Quebecois MPs will likely back the government. Making the vote unpredictable, however, is that the Liberals and NDP are divided.
NDP MP Joe Comartin, who said he would have preferred a more symbolic budget cut and will not support Mr. Gallaway, predicted most of the 19 New Democratic MPs will side with the government. The rest of his colleagues are still debating the matter, he said.
"For me, the big question mark is how many of the Liberals are going to defect and vote against the government," said Mr. Comartin, who represents Windsor-Tecumseh.
"The best estimate I can give you at the moment is between 10 and 20 [out of 135 Liberal MPs]," he said.
The proposed cut represents about 85% of the registry's annual budget. Mr. Gallaway would not comment on the practical effect of his motion, but Mr. Comartin said he is certain its passage would kill the registry.
The motion will be voted upon on Thursday, when annual spending estimates of all departments come before Parliament.
Last week, the government admitted it will take at least three more years to fully implement the registry, or a total of 12 years after Parliament created it.
The new timetable means the program will have cost at least $1.4-billion by then, said Conservative MP Garry Breitkreuz, who represents the Saskatchewan riding of Yorkton-Melville. The government originally promised the program would cost no more than $85-million.
Mr. Gallaway was one of the most outspoken agitators for Mr. Martin during the years of Liberal infighting under Jean Chretien, and was given responsibility for democratic reform when Mr. Martin became Prime Minister a year ago. But Mr. Gallaway found himself back on the backbenches after Mr. Martin's re-election.
Mr. Gallaway's biggest headlines during his time as parliamentary secretary came when he contradicted then-government House leader Jacques Saada as to whether a vote on an individual spending item such as the gun registry is a matter of confidence.
Mr. Gallaway said the registry would be fair game, while Mr. Saada warned of an election should such a motion pass. At the time, the Liberals had a majority and the debate was moot.
Now Mr. Gallaway is going to push his premise, confident Mr. Martin will not call an election over the registry. Mr. Gallaway said the government has had plenty of time to answer MPs' concerns about how the money is being spent, yet has failed to properly do so.
"I think we're entitled to a real explanation and we really have to quit spending money in this fashion," he said.
"We've had a lot of promises of change but I really don't have any time for those promises anymore. It's been nine years and it just keeps going.
"It never stops."
Mr. Saada's replacement in the House leader's office, Tony Valeri, said he wants to wait until tomorrow's deadline for such motions before deciding whether to threaten an election or not.
In addition to the motion from Mr. Gallaway, the House will also have to deal with two changes made by MPs in the government operations committee, which surprised many by slashing $417,100 from the Governor-General's budget and $127,223 from the mighty Privy Council Office.
In 2002, the Liberals capitulated to a Conservative motion blocking a $72-million funding request for the gun registry. It came on the heels of Auditor-General Sheila Fraser's blistering report describing the program as having the "largest cost overrun we've ever seen."
But the Liberals argued they were only delaying the money in light of the Auditor-General's report, and put forward more funding at a later date.
Bid to stop gun program's funding divides Liberals
Bill Curry
CanWest News Service
Monday, December 06, 2004
OTTAWA - A Liberal MP, once a loyal supporter of Paul Martin, is taking on his own fragile government in an effort to stop the flow of money to the gun registry.
In the biggest test of the Liberal minority since the Throne Speech vote on Oct. 7, Sarnia-Lambton MP Roger Gallaway's motion would scrap a $97-million payment to the Canadian Firearms Centre, essentially killing the program.
All 99 Conservative MPs are expected to support Mr. Gallaway, while the 54 Bloc Quebecois MPs will likely back the government. Making the vote unpredictable, however, is that the Liberals and NDP are divided.
NDP MP Joe Comartin, who said he would have preferred a more symbolic budget cut and will not support Mr. Gallaway, predicted most of the 19 New Democratic MPs will side with the government. The rest of his colleagues are still debating the matter, he said.
"For me, the big question mark is how many of the Liberals are going to defect and vote against the government," said Mr. Comartin, who represents Windsor-Tecumseh.
"The best estimate I can give you at the moment is between 10 and 20 [out of 135 Liberal MPs]," he said.
The proposed cut represents about 85% of the registry's annual budget. Mr. Gallaway would not comment on the practical effect of his motion, but Mr. Comartin said he is certain its passage would kill the registry.
The motion will be voted upon on Thursday, when annual spending estimates of all departments come before Parliament.
Last week, the government admitted it will take at least three more years to fully implement the registry, or a total of 12 years after Parliament created it.
The new timetable means the program will have cost at least $1.4-billion by then, said Conservative MP Garry Breitkreuz, who represents the Saskatchewan riding of Yorkton-Melville. The government originally promised the program would cost no more than $85-million.
Mr. Gallaway was one of the most outspoken agitators for Mr. Martin during the years of Liberal infighting under Jean Chretien, and was given responsibility for democratic reform when Mr. Martin became Prime Minister a year ago. But Mr. Gallaway found himself back on the backbenches after Mr. Martin's re-election.
Mr. Gallaway's biggest headlines during his time as parliamentary secretary came when he contradicted then-government House leader Jacques Saada as to whether a vote on an individual spending item such as the gun registry is a matter of confidence.
Mr. Gallaway said the registry would be fair game, while Mr. Saada warned of an election should such a motion pass. At the time, the Liberals had a majority and the debate was moot.
Now Mr. Gallaway is going to push his premise, confident Mr. Martin will not call an election over the registry. Mr. Gallaway said the government has had plenty of time to answer MPs' concerns about how the money is being spent, yet has failed to properly do so.
"I think we're entitled to a real explanation and we really have to quit spending money in this fashion," he said.
"We've had a lot of promises of change but I really don't have any time for those promises anymore. It's been nine years and it just keeps going.
"It never stops."
Mr. Saada's replacement in the House leader's office, Tony Valeri, said he wants to wait until tomorrow's deadline for such motions before deciding whether to threaten an election or not.
In addition to the motion from Mr. Gallaway, the House will also have to deal with two changes made by MPs in the government operations committee, which surprised many by slashing $417,100 from the Governor-General's budget and $127,223 from the mighty Privy Council Office.
In 2002, the Liberals capitulated to a Conservative motion blocking a $72-million funding request for the gun registry. It came on the heels of Auditor-General Sheila Fraser's blistering report describing the program as having the "largest cost overrun we've ever seen."
But the Liberals argued they were only delaying the money in light of the Auditor-General's report, and put forward more funding at a later date.
Wow! If $97 million represents only 85% of the annual budget, the annual budget is now about $114 million.Bull said:
This means that the current annual budget alone exceeds the original program cost of $85 million by about 34%.
And politicians and the government wonder why they get no respect????
Kind of makes our fast ferries debacle in B.C. look like a good deal!
We managed to seel the fast ferries for a few pennies. Maybe we could take a lesson from that and sell the gun registry to some other country for a few pennies as well. A country that could really use a gun registry. Iraq perhaps?
Mandatory Universal DNA and Fingerprinting!
Things are far too quiet on this thread.
Gun registry is a waste of time and money.
Instead, let's support mandatory DNA testing and fingerprinting of every man, woman and child in Canada. This would help to find criminals so much better than a gun registry and is a worthwhile cause no doubt supported by everyone except criminals.
If you don't support this, you must be guilty or have something to hide right?
Let's all write our MP and demand that parliament initiate this program right away.
We have a substantial federal surplus - let's invest it wisely and what better investment than a universal DNA and fingerprint registry? Once we have it up and running, we can recoup all of our costs and even make a profit by selling the policies, procedures and programs to the United States. They would pay handsomely for such a system that they could quickly implement and use .........
.........in Iraq.
P.S. In case you can't tell - obviously I'm kidding about the above and just having a little fun on a dull Monday morning. I added these lines to the bottom of the post to see how many people would start replying after reading only the first couple of lines and without reading the whole post.
Things are far too quiet on this thread.
Gun registry is a waste of time and money.
Instead, let's support mandatory DNA testing and fingerprinting of every man, woman and child in Canada. This would help to find criminals so much better than a gun registry and is a worthwhile cause no doubt supported by everyone except criminals.
If you don't support this, you must be guilty or have something to hide right?
Let's all write our MP and demand that parliament initiate this program right away.
We have a substantial federal surplus - let's invest it wisely and what better investment than a universal DNA and fingerprint registry? Once we have it up and running, we can recoup all of our costs and even make a profit by selling the policies, procedures and programs to the United States. They would pay handsomely for such a system that they could quickly implement and use .........
.........in Iraq.
P.S. In case you can't tell - obviously I'm kidding about the above and just having a little fun on a dull Monday morning. I added these lines to the bottom of the post to see how many people would start replying after reading only the first couple of lines and without reading the whole post.
Kev:
I don't have any problem in principle with a gun registry - if it can actually accomplish a useful, clearly written objective that the majority of the population supports. Unfortunately, the present registry has lost credibility and public support, is grossly over-priced, and does little more than greatly inconvenience the law-abiding rural population of Canada (and turn many of them into law-breakers).
If the government had, instead, invested the entire $1.4 billion into policing we might have got a better "bang" for the buck (couldn't resist the pun).
But then again, if the police had another $1.4 billion to spend they likely would have used some of it to fund more police stings on Kingsway, more raids on micro brothels, some raids on MPs and strip joints, and horrors of horrors perhaps even try to monitor escorts.
Hmmmmm..... .I guess it's best after all that the money was spent on the gun registry.
Penn
I don't have any problem in principle with a gun registry - if it can actually accomplish a useful, clearly written objective that the majority of the population supports. Unfortunately, the present registry has lost credibility and public support, is grossly over-priced, and does little more than greatly inconvenience the law-abiding rural population of Canada (and turn many of them into law-breakers).
If the government had, instead, invested the entire $1.4 billion into policing we might have got a better "bang" for the buck (couldn't resist the pun).
But then again, if the police had another $1.4 billion to spend they likely would have used some of it to fund more police stings on Kingsway, more raids on micro brothels, some raids on MPs and strip joints, and horrors of horrors perhaps even try to monitor escorts.
Hmmmmm..... .I guess it's best after all that the money was spent on the gun registry.
Penn
I realize the gun registry has gone way over the original budget. And is far from being perfect. However, I still support it as the cost savings in other areas that the gun registry will affect is well worth it.
Cost of Policing
With a universal registry the main result will be a significant decrease in crime. With the decrease crime rate, less police will be required resulting in cost savings. The data base of guns will also help police investigators in solving of gun crimes much faster which means a saving in time.
Medical Costs
Medical cost will also decrease as there will be a reduction in gun violence.
Social Benefits
Also the social benefits in terms of safer streets.
And finally no more tragedies like the shootings in Montreal.
Cost of Policing
With a universal registry the main result will be a significant decrease in crime. With the decrease crime rate, less police will be required resulting in cost savings. The data base of guns will also help police investigators in solving of gun crimes much faster which means a saving in time.
Medical Costs
Medical cost will also decrease as there will be a reduction in gun violence.
Social Benefits
Also the social benefits in terms of safer streets.
And finally no more tragedies like the shootings in Montreal.
Last edited:
Nicely put Kev!
Fudd, obviously you did not get the point I already made. The restricted registry did NONE of the things you stated the current non restricted registry does, and it has already been in effect for decades. Keep in mind that handguns, the criminal weapon of choice, is a restricted firearm, and we have been seeing an increase in their use. What will make the non restricted registry accomplish what you stated when it's focused is on the least common types of firearms used in violent crime?
I feel statements without justification or further explanations are usually full of assumptions rather than fact. A good example is the prohibition of handguns with barrels shorter than 102mm, and handguns .32 caliber or smaller except .22. It was assumed that these "Saturday night specials" were the weapons of choice. Law enforcement reports criminals prefer 9mm, 40 S&W, or .45 ACP large frame autos for pistols, as well as full auto SMGs. I think the law makers watch too much TV and don't consult the people in the know.
Fudd, obviously you did not get the point I already made. The restricted registry did NONE of the things you stated the current non restricted registry does, and it has already been in effect for decades. Keep in mind that handguns, the criminal weapon of choice, is a restricted firearm, and we have been seeing an increase in their use. What will make the non restricted registry accomplish what you stated when it's focused is on the least common types of firearms used in violent crime?
I feel statements without justification or further explanations are usually full of assumptions rather than fact. A good example is the prohibition of handguns with barrels shorter than 102mm, and handguns .32 caliber or smaller except .22. It was assumed that these "Saturday night specials" were the weapons of choice. Law enforcement reports criminals prefer 9mm, 40 S&W, or .45 ACP large frame autos for pistols, as well as full auto SMGs. I think the law makers watch too much TV and don't consult the people in the know.
Actually, the original estimate was a TOTAL cost of $2 million with it being self sustaining thereafter. As for a gun registry in Iraq... it would be ironic that they would probably only succeed by forcing registration at gun point!Penhold said:Wow! If $97 million represents only 85% of the annual budget, the annual budget is now about $114 million.
This means that the current annual budget alone exceeds the original program cost of $85 million by about 34%.
And politicians and the government wonder why they get no respect????
Kind of makes our fast ferries debacle in B.C. look like a good deal!
We managed to seel the fast ferries for a few pennies. Maybe we could take a lesson from that and sell the gun registry to some other country for a few pennies as well. A country that could really use a gun registry. Iraq perhaps?
I'm interested in the political side of this --- looks like the Bloc will stand behind the liberals and keep the registry afloat. Never thought I would see that.
I think the Bloc is trying to get political mileage from the "Ecole Polytechnique" murders. Pretty crass political move.... just my opinion.
I think the Bloc is trying to get political mileage from the "Ecole Polytechnique" murders. Pretty crass political move.... just my opinion.
