Register or control

[StrawBoss]

Why are so many gripers call gun registry “ gun control?”
You can have as many legal guns as you wish as long as you register them, so where is this bit about the farmers can’t have guns for protection or to kill predators?

One good thing about gun registry, it has brought attention to the gun owners to store their guns more safely, because I know there are a lot of people that are very careless with gun storage.

One reason the cost of gun registry is high is, because of poor cooperation from the gun owners by doing every thing possible to delay--- send in phony serial numbers—no numbers --- registering water pistols—tying up government information telephone lines and telling all their friends to do the same--- and calling the government stupid--- maybe look in the mirror. Cooperation—“what is that?”

These tactics are of a warlord mentality and maybe all you gun owners want to take the law into your own hands and return to the lawless old west?

We all know guns don’t kill but it’s the idiot that owns the gun that kills, so that is why we have laws and police to try and protect the good from the bad.

I know crooks don’t register guns, but if police stop a vehicle with an unregistered gun in it, the crook can’t have an excuse that he needs it to shoot gophers or should he?

One should try to understand the positive side of any change and don’t get hung up on only the negative.

[ivbinconned]

Strawboss; read and try to absorb...

Gun Control Law Failures Exposed Yet Again.

Professor Gary A. Mauser of Canada's Simon Fraser University recently
examined the impact of recently enacted gun bans in England, Australia and Canada, asking a basic question that the gun-prohibitionists never want to ask: "Do gun bans work?" Dr. Mauser provides empirical data to back up his definite conclusion that they do not.

In his paper titled "The Failed Experiment: Gun control and Public Safety in
Canada, Australia, England and Wales," Mauser examines the crime trends in
those commonwealth nations and also compares them to our own. He does not
simply look at firearm-related crime, but at all violent crime, explaining,
"the public would not be safer if the new law could reduce firearm violence
but had no effect on total criminal violence."

Mauser's research shows that since all handguns were banned in Britain in
1997, violent crime has skyrocketed. The United States and Britain had
similar violent crime rates in 1997, but since that time, we have seen
decreasing rates of violent crime, while the British have seen their violent
crime rate double. For the year 2000, the violent crime rate England and
Wales was well over twice what it was in the United States.

Mauser found similar trends in Australia. Following the passage of a
sweeping gun ban in 1997, robbery and assault rates have increased steadily
and homicide rates hover at historic highs, spiking in the latest year for
which data is available.

The findings in Canada show that in spite of the passage of strict gun
regulations in 1991 and again in 1995, the violent crime rate has not
dropped. During the period between 1995 and 2001, violent crime in the U.S.
dropped by approximately 25 percent, while in Canada it remained virtually
unchanged.

Dr. Mauser concludes that "disarming the public has not reduced criminal
violence in any country examined ... . In all cases disarming the public has
been ineffective, expensive, and often counter productive." he also finds
that "disarming the public greatly increases cynicism about government among
much of the population and it diminishes their willingness to comply with
other, future regulations that might even be more sensible."

In a telling concluding statement, Mauser writes, "The only winner in this
drama is bureaucracy. The rest of us lose liberty as well as safety. It is
an illusion that further tinkering with the law will protect the public
since no law, no matter how restrictive, can protect us from people who
decide to commit violent crime." And he adds, "We must ultimately rely upon
ourselves, and it is only right we have the necessary tools to do so."

Any gun owner who wants ready facts to counter those who argue that the
United States should follow Canada, England and Australia down the gun ban
path should read "The Failed Experiment." It is available on Dr. Mauser's
web page, www.sfu.ca/~mauser.

_________________
At the core of modern liberalism is the spoiled child - miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats . (PJ O'Rourke)

[StrawBoss]

Ivbinconned – read and try to absorb what I wrote because you missed the point.

I said the government is asking us to register our guns and doesn’t limit the number of legal guns we own. You can form your own opinion if registering firearms will lower the crime rate, I didn’t say it will or will not--- but it will make the owner responsible to know where the gun is at all times.

Dr. Mauser did a research only to see if the crime rate is increasing or decreasing and formed an opinion about the gun control. Due to globalization, increase in terrorism, easier access to drugs and more gangs the crime rate has increased and may have nothing to do with (gun control as you call it) and gun registration as I refer too. Dr. Mauser hasn’t proven anything about gun registry or gun control. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist or a professor of %$#& to see that crime is increasing, also some countries are not reporting the true numbers.

Gun registration will help police track down the gun owner if the firearm is found at the murder seen, he/she may not be the murderer but the register owner is responsible for that gun and has to report the gun stolen or explain why it was there-- has nothing to do in preventing the murder.

Like I said before gun registration has brought attention to gun owners to store guns more safely so that the crooks don’t steal them and your young children are not playing with loaded guns. I have no need for guns and besides I don’t think I could shoot a person breaking into my house (I bet the majority of the people could not pull that trigger)

How many school kids are shooting their classmates using their parent’s guns?
Gun registration promotes safe storage and if only one or two children are saved every year from gun related accidents would be a plus. What kind of a price tag do you put on your children’s lives if one of them got shot dead by your gun?

Yes government bureaucracy always has a large price tag, but in the gun registry issue I think the gun owners contributed to the outrageous cost.

These studies done by so-called experts or Dr, of $%#@ are concluded by an opinion on their finding and it has a big bearing if they favor the government in power or the opposition.
I can see you going to the negative side of any issue that is proposed by the government in power because you have been promoting western separation for years.

I am a different type of person and always try to understand both side of any government issues and form my own opinion, also don’t get misled by news media interpretation or opposition government propaganda.

I think most of us that write on these forums read news papers, watch TV and read books so your postings copied from these sources is old news.

I know you will say you are trying to prove a point, but I think an individual’s point of view is the way to go in this coffee shop, because we all watch the news at 6 o’clock.

[Ron]

Urban solutions to rural problems. It is easy to talk about firearms being obselete and dangerous if you live in toronto with a police station and neighbors but if you live in rural alberta with 911 25-30 minutes away if they can find your LSD I think a firearm is mandatory. I have had a car stolen from 30 feet in front of my house, I knew it was going but who cares? I called 911 and waited 2 hours with a very scared pregnant wife but really no harm done its only a car. BUT If somebody tries to enter my home where my wife and kids sleep they will get a 10 second warning to get out before the shooting starts and I dont care about the consquences, at least my kids will be around in the morning. My car and shop are property that can be replaced and anyone using weapons to protect is stupid but I wouldnt have a problem defending my home with lethal force.

[cowman]

Other than the outrageous cost was gun control really such a bad thing? Did it really affect the law abiding owner?
Of course criminals will get guns if they need them and licenses and registrations will not stop them...just like drunks will drive, law or no law.
Does that mean we should just throw our highways open?
If "gun control" keeps guns out of the hands of people who are obviously irresponsible or crazy, then I would suggest that might be a good thing?
What was the big deal? You paid $10 for a license and the registration cost nothing? How many people refused to license or register...quite a few! They turned themselves into criminals...for what?

[ivbinconned]

For what you ask...for freedom thats what.

Havn't you guys lived long enough to know a slippery slope when you see one?

Did you expect the gay rights agenda pushed along by the liberals back in the 70s to bring us to where we are today?? Two men getting married and then adopting little boys!!

I for one view every thing a government does with suspicion. Assuming that they always have some long term goal. In this case it is confiscation. Which they are already doing.

It is a perplexing and unpleasent truth that when men already have "something worth fighting for," they do not feel like fighting.

[cowman]

Well Ivebinnconned you can't stop progression...whether it's good or bad!
Good or bad is in the eye of the beholder.
Now I might not agree with a lot of things, including fruitcakes, and killing unborn babies, but the majority obviously do? Otherwise we would not have those things legalized?
Who would have ever thought that the government would be the biggest player in the gambling rackets, back in the seventies. Or the biggest bootleggers, back in the thirties?
This world is slowly sinking into a pretty depraved place and our governments are leading the way! And yet if the people didn't want it they would toss them out? We need to recognize the enemy...and it is us! That's just how it is and it won't get better! For some that is a sad thing and for others redemption is at hand!

[StrawBoss]

I think someone should have explained to Oscar Lacombe that the government is not depriving him from owning a gun and all he has to do is register it, also the registration was free. I can’t for the love of god understand a man at his age (or any other age) spending time in courtrooms to prove nothing of value and tying up court time and spending tax dollars. I am sure there are “don’t tell me what I can do” guys pushing him to be their front-runner and do their dirty political work and that is very sad.

I am sure some will say he is standing up for his rights and I would be the first one to support him if the government said that he can not own a gun, but he can have all the guns he wishes as long as they are registered and stored safely.

Ivbinconned---As for the slippery slope comment I better leave that for another discussion because Canada has a lot of dry level roads to drive on and I just looked out the window and I can’t see the Canadian army out there.

[ivbinconned]

One must have a blind spot to try and defend the Liberals gun registry.
How can you defend a government that spends Millions registering rusty old farmers shot guns while at the same time inadequately supplying our troops!!

These laws are not put in place to hassle the masses (that’s why you can’t see the army out side), they are put in place so that big brother can punish and make examples of those people they don’t like. They don't need troops out your window to make you submissive.
You need not fear…because they like liberals like you. You view the state as your friend; I view the state with suspicion. There is little in history that demonstrates that the former position…is the wise one.
They are selective as to who they persecute with their laws, by doing so they make precedents, and the mass media will not give you an unbiased report as to what is going on. Even though you “watch the six o’clock news”!

I suspect you agree with me…but you enjoy taking contrary positions.


The worst evils which mankind has ever had to endure were inflicted by bad governments. The state can be and has often been in the course of history the main source of mischief and disaster. Ludwig von Mises

[cowman]

I'm not sure if you were referring to me or Strawboss when you said the thing about being contrary...well we all know Strawboss definitely likes being contrary!
When the idea was floated of a gun registry I was dead against it! And without a doubt I still think they screwed up big time on how they did this thing. But the fact is the majority of the people in Canada wanted some better controls on guns? And who knows maybe the ultimate goal is to eliminate guns, but we must live in the here and now? A lot of the "gun control" system is just plain silly and I do believe the system was way too complex and costly, but we supposedly live in a civilized country and we need to obey the laws of the land? If you don't like the way the laws are written you do have the right to protest and convince the majority that they need to be changed? Breaking the law is not really an option?

[ivbinconned]

I believe that any man who takes the liberty of another into his keeping is bound to become a tyrant, and that any man who yields up his liberty, in however slight the measure, is bound to become a slave.

~ H. L. Mencken

[15444]

One thing about the registry. I know some of you were saying that the gun registry really hasn't affected the normal responsible gun owner, and I agree. But the fear I have is that nobody asks what is stopping government from taking the next step?

Environmental activists don't want people to kill predators, no matter what they are doing to livestock, whether it be bears, cougars, wolves, coyotes, and what not. Heck, people even want to save the gophers in SK.

So once government knows where the guns are, what stops them from prohibiting certain people from having guns? What stops them from going to the point of saying, 'The cougar population is more important then a few cows or a few sheep!'...Eh? Take away the guns from farmers and tighten the hunting season and the coyote, bear, wolf, etc etc populations will bounce back!...but at what cost?

And why does it stop there?...the gun registry is the first step in controlling a person's right to defend himself and his/her property. And some people would say, 'Awww BS!!, that will never happen!' My reply, 'How do you know?'. All you need is a 'animal terrorist' to make a few threats on a few minister's lives and you would be amazed at how fast bills could be introduced to further hamper the right for people to own guns.

I thank people like ivebinconned for fighting stuff like the gun registry because I never look at a bill itself, I look at the direction the bill takes and what could happen with further legislation.

[ivbinconned]

Thank you 15444,

Lets look at some history;

*The Soviet Union established gun control in 1929. From 1929 to 1953, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

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

*China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1976 20 million Anti-Communists, Christians, political dissidents and pro-reform groups, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

*Germany established gun control in 1938. From 1939 to 1945 13 million Jews, Gypsies, mentally ill people and other "mongrelized peoples," 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 1 million "educated people," unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and executed.

If you add up the numbers, that amounts to more than 55 million innocent people who have been slaughtered by their own governments. The first step was always the same--rendering citizens defenseless by restricting or confiscating their firearms.

Freedom-loving people are at far more risk from their own government than from all the criminals in the world combined! An armed man/woman has a chance to defend himself/herself against any would-be gangster or criminal. An unarmed man/woman has no chance at all against anybody, especially an oppressive, tyrannical government.

An armed citizenry is the only force that insures freedom. It isn't the militias that can insure freedom. It is simply the fact that if nearly every home owner is also a gun owner there isn't an army in the world big or strong enough to take the freedom of an armed populace like that, and tyrants know it

I refuse to be the frog in a slow warming frying pan.

Tyrants know something else too, a policy of speed creates alarm, go it slow, and most will not reconize the long term goal.
I live in prime whitetail area and from the mid seventies to now we have noticed a 70% drop in hunters. Driven by much higher licence fees and the registration chill!

[cakadu]

I can understand both sides to this gun registry issue - can't say I agree with everything, but I understand.

I also understand that there has been a drop in hunting numbers over the years - for a variety of reasons. How much effect do you suppose the anti-hunting message has had and the fact that it is no longer as socially acceptable to hunt? What about the fact that there are far more activities that one can partake in to offset hunting?

It seems that avid hunters will not be deterred by any of the above and will continue to hunt as long as they are able to. (I'm speaking with the voice of experience here - not that I'm a hunter, but I happen to live with one.)

[StrawBoss]

Have no fear we don’t need guns to shoot government people if we don’t like their policies because we have elections every four years and can kick them out by not re-electing them.

We need a realistic opposition so people have a choice to elect a new government if they don’t like the present policies, but just to babble that everything is wrong and we need crazies with guns --- warlords and followers controlling the government so it doesn’t too powerful and take away our rights is ludicrous.

Listing countries that were not truly democratic and comparing their gun laws with Canadian gun registry and suggesting we will loose our freedom is mind boggling that some Canadians even think that way.

Countries with established democracy will always remain that way and people will be free to own guns and use them responsibly, and I hope that there will always be laws to prevent crazies to own guns.

I suppose if you only dwell on all the wrongs and don’t trust your neighbor you will eventually be afraid of your own shadow.