Long Gun Registry -Yes- No
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
It's a passive device with no source of power. It just causes a signature-ripple of distortions to a magnetic field sweeping it.
To make a chip that could be triggered to disable a weapon would delight cops, but it would require a power source - which there is simply no efficient way to keep going without the pesky nuisance of things like battery replacement, which defeats the utilitarian usefulness of chipping in so many ways and on so many levels it's hard to know where to begin.
Plus people would have fits for a gazillion reasons, not the least of which being that they don't want to be faced with a situation where their hunting rifle has to be used for property defense and the crook has a disabler.
To make a chip that would blow up the gun and "disable" the holder would require embedding technology with a power-source in the gun that would be so complicated to install, and so risky because it could go off accidentaly, and so defeatable by criminals with a modicum of technical skill, that it would be insane to consider, plus no government agent up to and including RCMP are going to want to face every guy pointing their virgin, un-"enhansed" and loaded weapon at the agent in defense of having the weapon turned into a device than can be made to backfire on the holder.
What I'm talking about is basically the same technology Ottawa uses to license pets.
Cats and dogs have chips inserted under their skin, which are so small the animals never know they're there. If a stray animal is found, it's scanned, and if chipped, it's returned to its owner, otherwise it goes to the pound. If the animal had an owner who forgot to chip it, and if the owner is with-it enough to check the pound when they notice their pet didn't come home, they can claim the animal for the small cost of having a subcutaneous chip injected into the animal.
Aside from making it easier for cops to guess if they're dealing with a criminal if they stop someone with an unchipped weapon, and aside from how it ups the odds of getting a lost or stolen weapon back, and aside from it being a simpler, less intrusive and cheaper program to operate, it makes it more strait-forward for the situation of a cop stopping you and seeing you have weapons in terms of how he's to handle it.
If he scans them, and it pops up on his screen they're yours, and there's no outstanding warrants etc., then that ends the question of whether or not he should think about siezing the things and he can move on to more important things like asking if you'd noticed the stop sign.
It should become as impersonal and routine and hassle-free as checking the driver's license and vehicle registration.
Last edited:
Didn't you just say that people who understand stats get misused, didn't understand stats?
Now it's if we understood stats we wouldn't get suckered?
How, we understand aren't being suckered. Hence the post you originally quoted.
Chip away.
Keep chipping...
When you're trying to look all intellectually superior, you might not want to confuse "seizes" with "ceases".
Not much of a great big dif Ton.
Clinton reversed the Glass Stegal act.
To bad you don't.
No you're not.
To manipulate data to affect popular opinion.
I don't wonder how many people no longer believe stats, because of the purposeful BS paid statisticians come up with has been found out.
Are you really done trying to show us all how smart you think you are?
Here, read this and catch up to us...
http://lrc.surcollege.net/ebooks/Statistical Analysis Software Tutorial/Templeton.pdf
This is for Colpy in case he comes back to this thread considering that it has gone in so many directions...
Have you ever had experience with the magna trigger, I don't hear too much about it these days since I'm not into shooting anymore and only seen one.... years ago (this guy had everything new that came around)
And it seemed to work fine until he tried to change grips on his revolver.He just went back to the original and it worked fine again.
Have you ever had experience with the magna trigger, I don't hear too much about it these days since I'm not into shooting anymore and only seen one.... years ago (this guy had everything new that came around)
And it seemed to work fine until he tried to change grips on his revolver.He just went back to the original and it worked fine again.
They have guns that will only recognize the owner, technology is around.
Owner Recognition By Portable Guns - Patent Application 20070209267
Owner Recognition By Portable Guns - Patent Application 20070209267
Well, guys....I gotta say.......I don't like ANYTHING that complicates the operation of a firearm, because each complication increases expotentially the chance that when you need it, the weapon won't go off.
As seen by the change of grips in the example given....
If you don't want someone using your gun, don't let them have it. Retention holsters in the lower class and classes in weapons retention.......for those that carry in uniform. They work. Never surrender your weapon....full stop.
There is only one place for a loaded handgun: holstered on the hip......
Guns are dangerous. Deal with it. Treat them as such........you can't change the nature of the beast.
I am reminded of Tom Threepersons....who killed the two rustlers that had shot his father in Alberta, then joined the NWMP.....was the last of the gunfighters, killing several men in Canada and in his later career as an officer in Texas.....
Once a man saw Tom carrying his 1911 with the grip safety taped down and challenged him...... "Ain't that dangerous?"
"Damned right it is" Tom replied
He never shot anyone.....unintentionally.
Nor did anyone ever get any of his guns.
As seen by the change of grips in the example given....
If you don't want someone using your gun, don't let them have it. Retention holsters in the lower class and classes in weapons retention.......for those that carry in uniform. They work. Never surrender your weapon....full stop.
There is only one place for a loaded handgun: holstered on the hip......
Guns are dangerous. Deal with it. Treat them as such........you can't change the nature of the beast.
I am reminded of Tom Threepersons....who killed the two rustlers that had shot his father in Alberta, then joined the NWMP.....was the last of the gunfighters, killing several men in Canada and in his later career as an officer in Texas.....
Once a man saw Tom carrying his 1911 with the grip safety taped down and challenged him...... "Ain't that dangerous?"
"Damned right it is" Tom replied
He never shot anyone.....unintentionally.
Nor did anyone ever get any of his guns.
Thank you for your insight.....That magna trigger made for a nice conversation piece for awhile at the range though;-):lol:
Here's the patent's abstract:
"The invention presented in this work creates the possibility of a portable gun—revolver, pistol, carbine, riffle or hand-machine gun, to recognize its owner, in progressive levels of handling safety. Three levels of handling safety are established based on the evaluation of the grip force or its effect through material deformation or strain gage measurement. The first level of handling safety does not allow persons with grip force bellow a given limit, to shoot with a gun. The second level of handling safety enables the portable gun to recognize an individual as belonging to a smaller group than the first level. Now, the gun will only recognize for a successful firing an individual whose grip force, measured by one strain gage, fit into a small operational range, established and stored at the moment of acquisition by the owner. The third level of handling safety enables a portable gun to recognize an individual, as belonging to an even smaller group than in the second level. In practice this group is unitary and is composed by the person that grasped the handle to establish the average local grip forces, measured by six strain gages, at the acquisition moment. "
A system like this would never happen.
In the first place, there's nothing in it that actually guarantees the person firing the gun is the owner as per the described set of physical handling metrics to do with grip-strength etc. entered into a mini-database, presumably something like a PROM embedded in the gun somewhere.
The owner could have a twin-brother, or a brother, or even a friend with a grip and rate of trigger-pull virtually identical to the owner. Things like grip-strength and rate of gripping are not unique enough to identify an individual. If it was, then they'd have security systems for doors based upon how hard someone grabs a door handle and turns it.
In the second place, the amount of technology you'd have to wire into the weapon is so much that there's NO WAY I would ever trust the thing. It has too many parts, which means too many places for things to go wrong, and if there's anything you want to work when the decision is made to pull the trigger, it's a gun. I literally cannot tell you how many critical mission failures have happened from teams being required to use expensive, rococo technology when effective, tried-and-tested old-school technology was already there for doing the job.
The chip technology I've been talking about is completely non-invasive and does not get involved in the firing process of the gun at all. It's purely a method of unique identification; basically an embedded license-plate that emits zero electromagnetic fields itself, but will ripple a magnetic field passing through it with a signature pattern.
Colpy's chart showed exponential growth. The data I presented does not. That's a substantial difference.
Well, the full story is rarely understood for that quote. Most people are aware of the obvious, that numbers can be used in a manner that fit a hypothesis (but in reality do not), but far fewer realize that it also means that many people will choose to ignore statistics that are inconvenient, despite the validity of the figures.
For the most part, the first type listed above is often people using stats collected by someone else to say or support something that the original analysis does not support, rather than someone cooking the numbers. The second type is just cognitive dissonance.
What do you call it when they refuse to gather trustworthy data altogether in the first place?
The first phrase being the definition of the "evidence" used to create the registry, and now to retain it........the latter being the reason it is to be dumped.
The simple fact is, a large segment of the population simply doesn't care about the issue....and of those that do care, the majority want it gone.
Riiiiight...hence the delay and reluctance to release an RCMP report, and MP Vic Toews speaking for Canadians not needing to see any evidence to know something is true. The Government is tallying up a long list of departure from experts, and it's based on ideology.
I'd be curious about what data your "fact" concerning Canadian thoughts on the gun registry is based. Is it a quantifiable fact, or more of the Vic Toews 'We don't need to see any evidence to make the right decision' kind of fact?
Colpy -
If the registry dies here it what i predict - i wish I was wrong but i know i am not
As I have stated - the next massacre - and we all know full well the number of nutcases with guns - most without - but the next one will result a registry where the rules are so tough you will need a letter from the creator - That backlash will be immense.
And the dumb ass Conservative, sticking to ideology will be sitting across from where they presently sit in Parliament.
Harper will be Gonzo
And If Iggy is still leader - he will form either a strong minority of a slim majority Govt. God help us.
And I cannot stand either one of them -
Mark my words - Its a comin, another massacre and there will be hell to pay.
Look to the US to see how people react.
Harper is going on pure election promises and a freaking dumb one at that - he broke so many promises what would 1 more be.
He in his cotrol freak style has muzzled Govt mopre than Chretien ever had the gall to do.
We can cry all we want about the wasted monies - well it is gone
Your prediction may well come true Goober but that just demonstrates the true stupidity of many Canadians: we demonstrate a lack of root cause identification and trouble shooting skills. We want "quick and easy" solutions (that don't exist) to complex problems.
As stated earlier, Marc Lepine's massacre umpteen years ago (15? 16?) was the catalyst for the current registry but would it have prevented him? Did it stop that kid (again in Montreal) from going essentially copy catting him a couple years ago? No. Did it stop the shootings in Toronto that had the press abuzz a few years ago? No.
I am going to point a finger here, particularly at Eastern Urbanites, namely those in Montreal and Toronto (but Vancouverites largely share the same mindset), who are stupid enough to believe this type of knee jerk addresses anything. They are the ones that have the political clout and lobbied the Liberals for this inane response. The Conservatives seem a little more immune to the pleas on some issues but they're not much better.
I cannot disagree with you on your points brought forward - We need Dr's to have the ability to submit a demand that any Guns be removed - also a number of other factors come into play as you state
But I am also looking at the politics of this as one reason why i support a registry - 2 - What is wrong with registering a lethal weapon - none that i can think of outside of pure stubbornness-
And we all now at some time in the future a massacre will happen - and then look at the rules that will be demanded by the public -
I personally have no problem with the registry as it stands and do believe it does and can save lives.
yes you'll have another massacre, some poor Canadian patsy will be put up as the shooter....but he'll shoot himself or be shot.... there never is a surviver to say "I didnt do it" it'll be a classic problem, reaction, solution scenario.... I believe the correct term is psyop as in what happened in Port Artur
I got 2/3rds of the way through the act and stopped. It's flawed. Sadly true given the objectives, but flawed. Yeah yeah yeah you can whip me for not finishing it, for in that last third might have been the saving sections, paragraphs and sub-paragraphs, but sometimes you don't have to be shown more than one way for something to be wrong to know it's false.
Yet out of it, RCMP and cops are gleaning bits of useful information at the rate of something between 5-20 cents on the dollar, so there's *something* useful in it.
I don't know where to begin: You found an unregistered 306 in my house? That's not my 306. How do I know it wasn't planted? Someone must have snuck it in and put it there. Oh those darn kids always forgetting to take the bolt out after using it for target practice...
How many anonymous 306's are there in the world? etc. etc. yadda yadda.
It is lawyer juice.
Yet it gets through with an important level of tolerance, because there's just enough in there for the cops and the RCMP to get stuff out of it, they'll take it.
Did you know that if you go to a multi-national conference mixing it up with folk from another country, they are always curious about two things about Canada. I bet you don't know what those two questions are. I bet you don't know what the two things Canadians are noted by the rest of the world for. I bet you think it's igloos and beavers. I'm not going to tell you unless asked with actual curiosity... excuse me while I find a tune to play... it was a long day... http://tunes.digitalock.com/bfbwl.mp3 <-- my mood this evening
Okay that's bad. I'm back. Did you know that Harper made a suckhole action out of turning over all Canadian stockpiles of surplus plutonium to the Americans earlier?
Am I the only guys to read history and pretend he's a a starving Jew strung into being the little brat with the cute coat to be adopted by the emperor, justified by how he said there would be seven good years, and then seven bad years.
At that time, the pharaoh was not the boss-leader, He was just the religious boss who got money to maintain his temple guards. They had to pay grain for right to purchase blessing proportional to their grain.
Then a famine hit.
Only the Big giant Priest Pharaoh had the food to feed everyone, even though the original food came from them, such that they had to trade survival in exchange of control of their land, and that's why after that they got to take 10% from every subsequent crop.
That's the first recorded incident of someone using math.
I just had a dream where the previous poster said something to make himself feel so emotionally depressed that he feels like going to hell.
I'f you're ture Islam then youh are going to what? That Luyciger @@#$ed you"
Yet out of it, RCMP and cops are gleaning bits of useful information at the rate of something between 5-20 cents on the dollar, so there's *something* useful in it.
I don't know where to begin: You found an unregistered 306 in my house? That's not my 306. How do I know it wasn't planted? Someone must have snuck it in and put it there. Oh those darn kids always forgetting to take the bolt out after using it for target practice...
How many anonymous 306's are there in the world? etc. etc. yadda yadda.
It is lawyer juice.
Yet it gets through with an important level of tolerance, because there's just enough in there for the cops and the RCMP to get stuff out of it, they'll take it.
Did you know that if you go to a multi-national conference mixing it up with folk from another country, they are always curious about two things about Canada. I bet you don't know what those two questions are. I bet you don't know what the two things Canadians are noted by the rest of the world for. I bet you think it's igloos and beavers. I'm not going to tell you unless asked with actual curiosity... excuse me while I find a tune to play... it was a long day... http://tunes.digitalock.com/bfbwl.mp3 <-- my mood this evening
Okay that's bad. I'm back. Did you know that Harper made a suckhole action out of turning over all Canadian stockpiles of surplus plutonium to the Americans earlier?
Am I the only guys to read history and pretend he's a a starving Jew strung into being the little brat with the cute coat to be adopted by the emperor, justified by how he said there would be seven good years, and then seven bad years.
At that time, the pharaoh was not the boss-leader, He was just the religious boss who got money to maintain his temple guards. They had to pay grain for right to purchase blessing proportional to their grain.
Then a famine hit.
Only the Big giant Priest Pharaoh had the food to feed everyone, even though the original food came from them, such that they had to trade survival in exchange of control of their land, and that's why after that they got to take 10% from every subsequent crop.
That's the first recorded incident of someone using math.
I just had a dream where the previous poster said something to make himself feel so emotionally depressed that he feels like going to hell.
I'f you're ture Islam then youh are going to what? That Luyciger @@#$ed you"
Last edited:
I was speaking specifically about the chart you provided. I didn't see a huge difference in the suicide rate with long guns, after the gun registry was instituted.
Unless I am provided with all the data, the stat is false, especially when being presented by a gov't entity. Which is why you never see me use stats Ton.
Oh I'm curious. Please do tell.
Dude, you make it too easy.
Colpy;1324820 Once a man saw Tom carrying his 1911 with the grip safety taped down and challenged him...... "Ain't that dangerous?" "Damned right it is" Tom replied He never shot anyone.....unintentionally. :) Nor did anyone ever get any of his guns.[/QUOTE said:There is no other way to carry it. Learned that in the service and have been doing it ever since.