Re: Long Gun Registry -Yes- NoDec 6th, 2010
BECAUSE GUN OWNERS ARE NOT EVEN GRANTED THE SAME RIGHTS ENJOYED BY CRIMINALS
BECAUSE GUN OWNERS ARE NOT EVEN GRANTED THE SAME RIGHTS ENJOYED BY CRIMINALS
BECAUSE GUN OWNERS ARE NOT EVEN GRANTED THE SAME RIGHTS ENJOYED BY CRIMINALS
I keep telling people that, but they seem incapable of hearing.......Sorry for the purple yelling, but this gets incredibly frustrating.
Your local gang-banger can not have his home "inspected" unless the police can convince a judge to issue a warrant based on solid evidence that there is evidence pertaining to a specific crime therein.....fishing expeditions are most assuredly NOT allowed as they are banned under the Charter as unreasonable search.
But my home can be "inspected", and if I refuse, the refusal itself is reason for the judge to issue a warrant to search, with there being absolutely no evidence of any crime committed whatsoever.
Your local gang-banger, while his home is being searched (on a warrant issued only with reason of evidence pertaining to a particular crime) can NOT be expected to answer any questions whatsoever, can NOT be coerced into helping the officers, can NOT be forced to give evidence against himself, as that is a violation of his Charter rights.......
But while my home is inspected, I am ordered to answer all questions and offer all aid to the inspectors, on criminal penalty for refusal.
Gun owners are LESS than second class citizens, they are treated like no citizen at all.....
This all against a group that statistically has a murder rate about one half of that among the general population.....in other words, all this is aimed at a group that is the least likely to commit heinous crimes.......that is licensed gun owners. (despite being overwhelmingly of the gender that most commits murder)
Do you have ANY idea how insulting that is??? Then to have the brain dead ****heads of the NDP promise to "compromise" with a bill to relieve the concerns of gun owners.....and then they introduce a bill that leaves us MORE at the mercy of anti-gun bureaucrats, a bill that does absolutely nothing to reassure us, except to more deeply invade the privacy of those that served as members of the armed forces......
This is an attempt to destroy a culture that our politicians find politically incorrect and faintly threatening.
If someone can't abide the simple regulations they shouldn't be in possession of a gun. Why is that so difficult for you?
I can own a car without becoming a criminal. I can get a mortgage, buy a house, pay off the mortgage in a timely manner all without resorting to becoming a criminal doing it. Why is it that having to register your gun is so damn difficult for you, you have to make this much fuss about it? It's nothing compared to buying a house. Unless you want to give that gun to someone else who can't have a gun legally.
So what, it's the same in the car, the police can just stop you and start questioning you on a hunch. I can choose not to drive if it is that much of an imposition. Just like you can forego any guns in your home and at that point not suffer an "inspection" of your home and guns. Big deal. Same rights as everyone else bud.
You seem to be quite ignorant of firearm regulations; they are not only not simple, but they have baffled judges, prosecutors, and defense barrisers since their inception. When learned counsel can't decipher "simple" regulations, how exactly do you expect the general population to do so?
Owning a house or car cannot make you a criminal, owning a firearm and having your license to do so lapse will. Many people drive with expired licenses and/or plates simply because they forgot to renew, that nets a fine, not a criminal charge. Why can't you get that through your head?
Ignorance still abounds.
Police can stop you in your car but cannot search it on a "hunch". They still need probable cause, that is a court tested constitutional right. Your refusal to let police search your car cannot be deemed probable cause.
You cannot refuse a firearm inspection. If you don't have the sanctity and security in the home you have nothing.
For many, the responsibility to defend themselves and those under their care is very important.
Would you suggest that if the responsibility to defend a spouse and children is to great that the answer would be to get rid of them? I certainly hope not. And if you would willingly defer that responsibility to the authorities, you do them a great disservice and don't deserve them anyway.
There is never a shortage of people who feel they simply can not manage the arduous task of cueing up and filling out forms. Most lawyers and judges are worse, can barely manage the simplest of tasks. I know, I've hired them.
As I said, if it's too difficult for you to abide the regulations, don't own a gun.
No one forgets to renew their licence. Christ on a rubber crutch you get the forms in the mail three months before and they expire on your birthday. Do you often forget your own birthday? Yeah if you drive around with expire plates, or insurance then you're a criminal.
Yeah as if. All the cop needs to do is bring the K9 unit out and say the dog indicated. No need to find something. So understand the police can ask you to submit to a search or simple hold you for a number of hours and then release you without charge. As we've seen during G20 in Toronto.
Of course a law abiding gun owner doesn't have something to hide from the police do they?
You think the police are violating the security of your home when they come to inspect your gun collection to make sure it is safe, legal and secure?
So what you are saying is that you want a gun to shoot people with. I mean that's just fine by me. Hell I support the notion but you need to be up front about why you want firearms in the first place. Like claiming it's for hunting while it's really for shooting people who come into your home.
Life is a dangerous prospect. Of course you have a right to defend those you care for. It's ridiculous to think otherwise. But you can't just do anything you can think of because you want to prepare for any possible scenario. It's too dangerous to life like that anywhere near people. I mean if you really want to protect them there are plenty of extremely remote islands in Canada that you can hide away on, that will allow for you to avoid contact with other people and you can make the defences you want to a degree. But you can't do that within society. It makes it too dangerous to those who live around you.
Some things you just have to come to terms with. You're kids could die being run over by a bus or crushed by a falling box while shopping. All kinds of terrible things could happen that you just can't control.
Granted, the legal profession does have its share of dull stars, however, it is still their job to know and understand law. If it were as simple as filling out forms the debate would be limited, but the firearms act is full of traps and contradictions. If prosecutors, judges and defense can't agree on interpretation then the law is seriously flawed. Law enforcement agencies have a history of inadvertently violating the firearms act, with the OPP being one of the worst offenders, so I guess in your opinion they should be disarmed and criminally charged as well.
I don't know what the colour of the sky is in your world, everyone who lives a productive life will, at some point in time forget to renew some sort of license, unless they don't live long enough. The firearm license renewal forms only come in the mail as a courtesy, not a requirement. The license doesn't expire on your birthday once a year, it is every 5 or 10 years depending on the type of license. This accompanied with driver's licenses, plates, vehicle inspections, professional papers, and such that are good for more than one year guarantees a missed deadline at some point. People like yourself throw the term "criminal" around willy nilly to support your argument. An expired driver's license or registration in and of itself is not an offense under the criminal code, hence it is not a criminal act. An expired firearms license while in possession of firearms is, big difference.
Police can ask you to stand on your head and whistle Dixie too, that doesn't mean you have to comply, and they can't simply say the dog indicated something.
You can refuse a search until they produce a warrant, and the search has to be conducted within the parameters of the warrant. Judges get really, really annoyed at police and prosecutors when citizens rights have been violated and evidence has to be disallowed.
We'll see how the G20 thing works out, if it is proven that people were arrested without cause there could be a bit of a $h*tstorm raining down on some heads, but David miller and his gang of enforcers were not big fans of civil liberties so I'm not holding my breath.
Do you? An honest cop lecturing a first year law class once said he can follow anyone around and catch them violating some law within 35 minutes. Everyone has something to hide, even if they don't know what that something is.
My security against unreasonable search and seizure? You bet. Do you think they are coming over for a cup of tea? When is the last time you've heard, "I'm from the government, I'm here to help you"? As I said, it is easy to find something that will run you afoul of the law, and even if the police think you're doing something wrong, they seize your property, possibly charge you, you incur the convenience of repeated court appearances and gladly pay hefty legal bills, because you've done nothing wrong, and your cooperation is for the greater good. Right. Would you allow police to go on a fishing expedition in your home? Hell, even the most despotic English kings of centuries past affirmed the sanctity of one's home.
That's exactly what the leftyLibs and Ndippers want.
Hmmm, you support the legislation the previous government enacted in order to disarm citizens, (make no mistake, that was the intent), but you also support notion of someone wanting a firearm to shoot people, which is a sure fire way to be denied a license, a bit of a dichotomy here. I have yet to meet a legitimate firearm owner who wants to shoot people, however, the mere presentation of a firearm for defense nearly always suffices. It does happen quite often, and violent crimes are averted. Because it can land you in a world of hurt it is rarely ever reported, (it is unlikely a perpetrator will report it either) so there are no stats.
As for being up front, for example, I visited a cigar shop in Toronto and the shop keeper had a bat behind the counter. You don't suppose he was planning on playing a few innings during breaks do you?
Why would it be dangerous to live around people who are willing and able to defend themselves?
Yes, life is dangerous, but the law as written has the perverse effect of causing even more danger. Disarming citizens emboldens criminals. Heavily ristricting handguns will mean rifles will more likely be used, and if discharged in an uban setting can easily result in tragedy. And since armed self defense is frowned upon it is harder for people to get the proper training it requires. The gunophobia that pervades our society is as misdirected as it is irrational. People have defended their homes with firearms for centuries, and I can guarantee that there are some doing it your community. You may or may not know who they are, the bonus is that neither do the criminals. Do you want them to know, or would you prefer that they knew no one had any means of armed defense?
Accidents happen, but still they happen by chance. Crime is no accident. Criminals seek targets, the easier the better. Violent criminals are often armed, may attack in groups and are intent on causing harm. Like any predator, they target their vicitms.
I still don't understand the justification for leaving one's self vulnerable because it makes others feel better. It really is none of their business. There are some things we can control, we guard against them or at least try to mitigate any injury from misadventure that might befall us. If criminals target Wendy Cukier's home instead of mine, would that be an accident?
It has been regulated, for a long time, and the regulations get more onerous with each passing decade until firearm ownership is regulated into non existance. The funny thing is though, no amount of regulation has had any positive effect on the criminal use of firearms. What it has done though is driven a wedge between firearms owners and law enforcement, alienating very many of the same folks they used to rely on to help solve crime, now that's a tragedy.
Prosecutors and defence attorneys don't need to agree on anything. The judge interprets law as it applies to each case. That's the way law works. Anyone violating the firearms act should disarmed and charged. But it's ridiculous to attempt to treat a government agency as though it were a person. Why do you need to try and make these at best spurious connections if you have an actual argument?
Not all licenses are the same. If you forget to get your fishing license and go catch a trout, big deal, pay a fine.
You forget to get your license to practice medicine and go do some surgery, you're going to jail. Boo hoo. It's not a library card it's a permit to buy and keep a weapon. You must be held to the highest standard for safety sake. Same with explosives or pyrotechnics. No bozos. Sorry if that excludes you.
Like I said you can do what ever you think you should but the police have the power to make your life very uncomfortable. A tiny little bag of Cannabis in your car and all the searching is legal. Just because some other family member or a friend left it doesn't invalidate the search.
Right off the bat of the over 1100 people charged, some 800 had the charges dropped, released unconditionally or never booked at all. That's fact, recorded for history and part of the public record. Miller is gone. But those whose right were violated remain. The other shoe is just starting to drop. How did you feel about the police action during the G20? Consider that when they come for you, all those people you never bothered to stand up for when their rights were being violated aren't there to stand up for you now.
Some laws are pointless and unenforced. Generalities aside, if you want to keep a gun which has a whole list of problems associated with it, then you need to be very careful about what you do with it and how you take care of it. If that is too difficult, like it is for some people to own a car, then you simply don't own one. It's not your right to have one in Canada.
Really? You actually think that in a stand off with the police you are some how going to win? Oh my I didn't consider that I was talking to mister koo koo bananas today. heh heh heh Ok dumb ***, because no one has told you yet, you don't have any where near the fire power to stand off the police. No matter how macho your 12 gauge might make you feel, in the end, you will be dead or in cuffs. So get the bull**** out of your head right now before you hurt yourself or those around you. If you feel your rights have been violated we have courts for that. You don't use a gun against the police ever.
Hey if you want to own a gun it's quite legal to do. There are plenty of stores all around the GTA that will happily sell you rifles or handguns as long as you can show that you are legally entitled to buy and own them. Criminals don't get guns from trees or as Colpy asserts, make them themselves. They get them from people who own guns that are willing to break the law in order to make some fast money. That is who this registry is going to help trip up. Along with all the other regulations, it goes to reducing the problems that come along with guns and irresponsible people.
Maybe he just wants to brandish it? heh heh
A bat is one thing. It won't kill anyone from twenty feet away that could crush your head like a tick if you came close enough. That's what guns do. A gun makes the person holding it potentially lethal. Hence all the regulations.
Because people are sometimes emotional. Passions take over reason and tragedy happens. A gun, especially a hand gun, makes that quick and convenient without a whole lot of bother with reflection and sober second thought. Go try and do that with your kung fu moves.
If you want to defend yourself, get a steel door and frame, good locks, a dog, insurance and have a phone handy to call 911. That in and of itself will resolve 99.9% of all your defence issues.
It's not frowned upon, it's illegal. You shoot anyone and you are going to be charged. That's the law.
And very rare. It's not Mad Max out there, as a matter of fact crime has been dropping. Gangbangers have been killing each other, but that doesn't affect you at all does it? I mean you don't strike me as a young urbanite from a minority and a broken home, though correct me if I am wrong.
It doesn't matter how many guns you have, I can still put one right behind your ear as you come out to check the mail box or pick up the paper from the bushes. I can drive my car right into the back of yours and blow your brains out before you even get out of your car. Hell I can run over your kid on his way home from school and then call you to the scene and shoot you from someone's porch as you come running up. If everyone can have guns, then anyone can do that. So don't think for a moment that if you have a gun on your hip you would be any safer than you are right now.
Like I said, if you feel you really really have to have a gun in your home for what ever reason, if eligible, fill out the paper work, take the tests and get certified to own and keep a weapon. If you can't manage that, then you shouldn't have a gun. Simple as that.
If we had gun owners and government working together to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, we would be far more effective as preventing many of the murders, accident and suicides that are now every day occurrences in the US and Canada. Instead we have a War On Guns that makes sure everyone comes out a loser. Thank your local gun lobby for that.
I am an avid drug user and promote the legalization of drugs openly and any time I have the chance. I still am friendly toward most police officers who are doing a job which doesn't run afoul of my enjoyment of drugs. Surely if you are responsible with gun ownership, you too can be cordial with the authorities.
Unforgiven: You have absolutely no clue about the long gun registry and it's abuses of laws and charter rights do you?
The most important point of the whole law is that it targets law abiding taxpayers and tries to make criminals of them while doing absolutely zero to combating criminal activity by those with illegal automatic hand guns.
It is perverted laws like this that cause such widespread disrespect for the rule of law and our government.
I just got a phone call this Sunday Morning, from a Representative of the Conservative
Party of Canada, asking about my stance & knowledge on the Long Gun Registry.
It was brought up in regard to the last vote in Parliament (the two vote loss thing with those
who had supported the abolishing this thing earlier flip-flopping, etc...), and a campaign
to heavily advertise in the ridings of those in the Liberal & NDP camps who flip-flopped
right at the vote time. Hmmmm....
Long Gun Registry - Yes - No
“There are some police officers who disagree with the government’s position. On the other hand, all of the elected police officers in the Parliament of Canada support the government’s position,” said Prime Minister Stephen Harper on Monday during a visit to Churchill, Man.
“Canadians have been very clear. They want us to spend our time and our money focusing on the criminal misuse of firearms and not going after law-abiding duck hunters and farmers.”The gun strategy to be adopted by all police forces would outline policy standards on officer training, the operation of firearms and legislation.
Well according to your latest poll numbers, Goob - Canadians are not as far apart on the issue as I might have thought.
Mr. Harper is dead on when he speaks to the need for resources being focused on training, firearms and legislation. I cannot remember the last time I heard of some gang member whacking anyone with a deer rifle. The main focus should be on finding a way to keep the illegal guns out of the hands of the criminals. Every time I hear of another gang shooting on the coast, I just cringe and wonder when someone I love might get caught in the cross-fire. These guys haven't registered their guns - you can be sure of that.
Put the money where it is needed - on control of illegal weapons.
Q. Do the licensing and registration requirements apply to bows?
Crossbows that can be aimed and fired with one hand and crossbows with an overall length of 500 mm (about 19.68 inches) or less are prohibited. You cannot lawfully possess or acquire a prohibited crossbow.
The state of Wisconsin has gone an entire deer hunting season without someone getting killed. That's great. There were over 600,000 hunters.
Allow me to restate that number. Over the last two months, the eighth largest army in the world - more men under arms than in Iran; more than France and Germany combined - deployed to the woods of a single American state to help keep the deer menace at bay.
But that pales in comparison to the 750,000 who are in the woods of Pennsylvania this week. Michigan's 700,000 hunters have now returned home. Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia. and it is literally the case that the hunters of those four States alone would comprise the largest army in the world.
The point? America will forever be safe from foreign invasion with that kind of home-grown firepower.
They are going to run out of aluminum to smelt sooner or later and I don't want them coming after my stash.