poll:gun registery

JamesBondo
Spade
Free Thinker
+2
#2
For balance... YES
Please change the percentage.
 
JamesBondo
#3
with 4000 voters, you didn't change anything.
 
Spade
Free Thinker
+3
#4  Top Rated Post
Correction: 1/4000 = 0.00025 = 0.025%. I did.
You aren't a friend of democracy, are you?

A self-selected reader poll that allows responders to vote multiple times is less than representative. Now, the percentage based on 4013 responses is only 64.49%. I stopped there because my voting finger is tired.
 
Colpy
Conservative
+3
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

Correction: 1/4000 = 0.00025 = 0.025%. I did.
You aren't a friend of democracy, are you?

A self-selected reader poll that allows responders to vote multiple times is less than representative. Now, the percentage based on 4013 responses is only 64.49%. I stopped there because my voting finger is tired.

Yeah, on-line surveys are pretty well a joke.

But we elected the Harper gov't to "dismantle the Long Gun Registry".

The data IS the registry, and the election was the only poll that matters.
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
+1
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

Correction: 1/4000 = 0.00025 = 0.025%. I did.
You aren't a friend of democracy, are you?
A self-selected reader poll that allows responders to vote multiple times is less than representative. Now, the percentage based on 4013 responses is only 64.49%. I stopped there because my voting finger is tired.

I tried to balance your bad voting out but the poll wouldn't let me.
 
Spade
Free Thinker
+1
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

Yeah, on-line surveys are pretty well a joke.

But we elected the Harper gov't to "dismantle the Long Gun Registry".

The data IS the registry, and the election was the only poll that matters.

Nonsense, among the minority of Canadians who voted for Harper, many made that decision on issues other than abolition of the registry. You are a good propagandist, but a bad apologist.

Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

I tried to balance your bad voting out but the poll wouldn't let me.

Delete cookies before logging back on to the site. Please don't go too wild.
Last edited by Spade; Apr 6th, 2012 at 09:42 PM..
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
+1
#8
Harper was not voted into office to kill the gun registry. If that is the only reason he won, that would reflect badly on the IQ of the average Canadian voter. Harper won because the Cons did such a fine job of character assassination on Iggy (who didn't need any help from them). The majority of Canadians did not vote for the Cons. I don't see the need for or the logic behind the long gun registry but I think Harper used it to garner votes more than actually cared about it. I mean, the man poses for pictures with kittens wearing blue cardigans, for gawd's sake. I doubt he knows how to use a gun. Perhaps Dick Cheney could show him how.
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
+1
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Harper was not voted into office to kill the gun registry. If that is the only reason he won, that would reflect badly on the IQ of the average Canadian voter. Harper won because the Cons did such a fine job of character assassination on Iggy (who didn't need any help from them). The majority of Canadians did not vote for the Cons. I don't see the need for or the logic behind the long gun registry but I think Harper used it to garner votes more than actually cared about it. I mean, the man poses for pictures with kittens wearing blue cardigans, for gawd's sake. I doubt he knows how to use a gun. Perhaps Dick Cheney could show him how.

Boy do you got that wrong. Around here that was the main reason for voting.
 
DurkaDurka
No Party Affiliation
+3
#10
F the registry and good riddance to it. Next thing you know, they'll want me to register my Trident, yes I have a Trident.
 
JamesBondo
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Harper was not voted into office to kill the gun registry. If that is the only reason he won, that would reflect badly on the IQ of the average Canadian voter. Harper won because the Cons did such a fine job of character assassination on Iggy (who didn't need any help from them). The majority of Canadians did not vote for the Cons. I don't see the need for or the logic behind the long gun registry but I think Harper used it to garner votes more than actually cared about it. I mean, the man poses for pictures with kittens wearing blue cardigans, for gawd's sake. I doubt he knows how to use a gun. Perhaps Dick Cheney could show him how.

The Liberals were not voted into office to protect the billion dollar registry.
 
Spade
Free Thinker
#12
Some statistics.
Scrapping the long-gun registry: some relevant numbers - Canada - CBC News
 
Niflmir
Free Thinker
+1
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

Yeah, on-line surveys are pretty well a joke.
But we elected the Harper gov't to "dismantle the Long Gun Registry".
The data IS the registry, and the election was the only poll that matters.

The majority of electors (60%) did not vote for the Conservatives.
 
Colpy
Conservative
+1
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by NiflmirView Post

The majority of electors (60%) did not vote for the Conservatives.

(sigh)

The majority did not vote for Chretien in 1993 either, in fact less than 42% voted for him, and he had to push the Firearms Act through over a caucus revolt.

There are problems with the FPTP system, but it IS legitimate........as is the gov't.
 
DurkaDurka
No Party Affiliation
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by NiflmirView Post

The majority of electors (60%) did not vote for the Conservatives.

Although we can say that for the last few governments (conservatives & liberals).
 
Niflmir
Free Thinker
+1
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

(sigh)
The majority did not vote for Chretien in 1993 either, in fact less than 42% voted for him, and he had to push the Firearms Act through over a caucus revolt.
There are problems with the FPTP system, but it IS legitimate........as is the gov't.

Well I disagree with the legitamacy, but that is another issue entirely.

Saying that the election is the only poll that matters for justifying a certain issue is just plain wrong, and that is what I was pointing out. If it were right, then the Conservatives would have no business dismantling what a previously elected government created. Especially when that government at 42%, had a larger plurality than the current 40%. Sure it is enough to be legal, but does it represent the will of the people?

In this case yes, but in others it won't.

The real question is... do I reverse engineer their javascript and spam their online poll?
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

Some statistics.
Scrapping the long-gun registry: some relevant numbers - Canada - CBC News

Quote:

From 1995, when the firearms registry became law, to 2010, there was a 41 per cent reduction in homicides by long guns.

And an almost immediate increase in homicides by handguns. See the red dotted line in the graph? And besides, the graph also shows that the rate of homicides by long guns was going down anyway.
(I didn't read any farther than that because stats are not that useful in displaying good sense sometimes.)
 
Spade
Free Thinker
#18
However, over time the rate for handguns is essentially flat. 0.3 deaths/100 000 population
 
Niflmir
Free Thinker
#19
The real point of the statistics seems to be that people are killing their family less often.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-...561-chart9.jpg
 
JamesBondo
#20
The trending is following various trends like an aging baby boomer population, abortion(unwanted children growing up to be criminals), inner city crime related to drugs, etc.

The weakest correlation exists with the gun registry.
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

However, over time the rate for handguns is essentially flat. 0.3 deaths/100 000 population

lol Yep. The registry had little or no effect on homicide by shotgun either. I'd suggest that the rate of rifle homicides had nothing to do with the registry. Like StatsCan showed, the rate was going down before rumblings about the registry anyway. Probably because of the increase in availability of illegal handguns.

Quote: Originally Posted by NiflmirView Post

The real point of the statistics seems to be that people are killing their family less often.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2011001/article/11561/c-g/E-11561-chart9.jpg

And that appears to have been occurring before the registry also.
 
Niflmir
Free Thinker
+1
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

lol Yep. The registry had little or no effect on homicide by shotgun either. I'd suggest that the rate of rifle homicides had nothing to do with the registry. Like StatsCan showed, the rate was going down before rumblings about the registry anyway. Probably because of the increase in availability of illegal handguns.
And"]http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2011001/article/11561/c-g/E-11561-chart9.jpg

[/URL] And that appears to have been occurring before the registry also.[/QUOTE]

The only thing that a registry could conceivably accomplish anyways is convicting criminals of possession related crimes before they actually commit a crime.

That is to say, we all know that criminals won't register their guns. So if a person is driving down the street with an unregistered gun on their way to commit a robbery, the police have grounds to arrest them before that crime is ever committed.

Unfortunately, it seems the police only used the registry to target people for random inspections to charge them with lame infractions related to safe storage.

Police should need a warrant to check that information. That goes for hand guns too.
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#23
I'd suggest that the reason homicide rate started calming down is because of more legal attention to the issue (like enforcement, harsher sentences, etc. ) than anything registry-wise.

Quote: Originally Posted by NiflmirView Post


The only thing that a registry could conceivably accomplish anyways is convicting criminals of possession related crimes before they actually commit a crime.

That is to say, we all know that criminals won't register their guns. So if a person is driving down the street with an unregistered gun on their way to commit a robbery, the police have grounds to arrest them before that crime is ever committed.

Unfortunately, it seems the police only used the registry to target people for random inspections to charge them with lame infractions related to safe storage.

Police should need a warrant to check that information. That goes for hand guns too.

yep.
 
Niflmir
Free Thinker
#24
I really wonder why it increased from 1965-1977. It has just been decreasing since then, so probably some people were taught that violence was the answer back in the late 60's early 70's, and we've just beed dealing with the fallout ever since.

Homicide in Canada, 2010 (external - login to view)
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
+2
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by NiflmirView Post

I really wonder why it increased from 1965-1977. It has just been decreasing since then, so probably some people were taught that violence was the answer back in the late 60's early 70's, and we've just beed dealing with the fallout ever since.

Homicide in Canada, 2010 (external - login to view)

they were hunting hippies?
 
JamesBondo
#26
1965 is 20 years after 1945, sounds like 65 was one of the first years that the unwanted baby boomers ( no abortion) reached adult hood.
 
Colpy
Conservative
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by JamesBondoView Post

1965 is 20 years after 1945, sounds like 65 was one of the first years that the unwanted baby boomers ( no abortion) reached adult hood.

NOT QUITE.

There was little legal abortion in Canada before the eighties, so that kinda shoots that out of the water.........I am NOT a fan of the philosophy that murder rates have dropped because free abortion eliminated unwanted (read "undesireable") children.

It simply smacks of racism and class hatred, with a hint of eugenics.

The simple fact is that the vast majority of murder is committed by young men. When the boomers hit their late teens, murder rates rose, and continued to rise with the wave of of young men hitting the age......and receeded as the demographic wave receeded.

Simple as that.
 
wulfie68
No Party Affiliation
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by NiflmirView Post

The only thing that a registry could conceivably accomplish anyways is convicting criminals of possession related crimes before they actually commit a crime.

That is to say, we all know that criminals won't register their guns. So if a person is driving down the street with an unregistered gun on their way to commit a robbery, the police have grounds to arrest them before that crime is ever committed.

Unfortunately, it seems the police only used the registry to target people for random inspections to charge them with lame infractions related to safe storage.

Police should need a warrant to check that information. That goes for hand guns too.

The registry was also supposed to stop events like the L'Ecole Polytechnique massacre from happening again, according to Alan Rock and his sycophants. Given that the shootings at Dawson College happened, it appears to have failed in that objective as well.

It was kneejerk legislation that was flawed in concept and implementation, and should never have been passed. I am not opposed to reasonable gun control measures (such as safe storage laws and background checks being required for permits to purchase, etc), but the registry went far beyond reasonable.
 
JamesBondo
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

.I am NOT a fan of the philosophy that murder rates have dropped because free abortion eliminated unwanted (read "undesireable") children.
It simply smacks of racism and class hatred, with a hint of eugenics.

It seams that your ears are hearing 'smacks' from previous posts from other members, for I will maintain that unplanned pregnancies are not exclusive to race, class, or gene pool.

Yet, 100,000 children from caring parents ( that wanted them from the word GO ) are likely to be better adjusted civilians.
 

Similar Threads

19
Serious Stuff Poll #1
by Haggis McBagpipe | Feb 27th, 2006
2
poll please?
by Anonymous | Jun 26th, 2002
no new posts