Bill to Abolish Gun Registry Passes 2nd Reading

[Cannuck]

If that's not the case, then what do you possibly have to say that I care about?

What have I said to indicate that it matters to me what you care about? I'm simply pointing out your misinformation for others to see. I don't want others confused by the falsehoods you promote (like a mother will be charged and convicted of a crime simply because her kid isn't wearing a seat belt or a kid being convicted of a crime because his registration expired).

I'm not sure what the law is in Berlin but maybe you should stick to discussing German law.

 

[Niflmir]

What have I said to indicate that it matters to me what you care about? I'm simply pointing out your misinformation for others to see. I don't want others confused by the falsehoods you promote (like a mother will be charged and convicted of a crime simply because her kid isn't wearing a seat belt or a kid being convicted of a crime because his registration expired).

I'm not sure what the law is in Berlin but maybe you should stick to discussing German law.

The truth of the matter is, yes, a mother will be convicted of a crime if her child isn't wearing a seatbelt and an accident occurs, logically resulting in that child's death.

Further, you will be convicted (on summary conviction, don't blame me if you don't know the difference) if you are driving an unregistered vehicle.

So, as usual, you have no point. Don't blame me if you cannot synthesise information. I mean, you cannot even fathom the thought that I might be Canadian yet live in Berlin. You're just small minded it seems.

 

[Cannuck]

You still don't get it.

You can compare failing to register a rifle with failing to fasten a seat belt. You can not compare failing to register a rifle with failing to fasten a seat belt and causing the death of another individual.

In your example, the failure to act contributed to the end result. That is why failing to do up a seat belt is generally not a crime in and of itself. It is also why failing to register a rifle should not be a crime in and off itself. Now, if failing to register a rifle led to the death of an individual then by all means lay criminal charges.

So to recap..

The very fact of the matter is that they intentionally are not registering and they...

You have claimed to know the intent of people that fail to register weapons - FAIL

Further, harmful inaction--AKA neglect--is considered criminal in many laws: not insuring or registering your vehicle, not asking for ID when you serve alcohol,

You have claimed that failing to register a vehicle constitutes criminal negligence - FAIL

The statement "An offence that requires proof of intent,..." clearly implies that not all offences require proof of intent-

This was in response to my statement "Criminal liability is "An offense that requires proof of intent, knowledge or recklessness as well as violation of the Criminal Code", and clearly shows you are either not reading what you are responding to or do not understand what you are reading. - FAIL

 

[Cannuck]

Niflmir​

​

Reporting a Post Bill to Abolish Gun Registry Passes 2nd Reading - 19 minutes ago

What post could you possibly be reporting?
​

 

[bobnoorduyn]

The truth of the matter is, yes, a mother will be convicted of a crime if her child isn't wearing a seatbelt and an accident occurs, logically resulting in that child's death.

Further, you will be convicted (on summary conviction, don't blame me if you don't know the difference) if you are driving an unregistered vehicle.

So, as usual, you have no point. Don't blame me if you cannot synthesise information. I mean, you cannot even fathom the thought that I might be Canadian yet live in Berlin. You're just small minded it seems.

Umm... first you're dealing with Tennesee law, irrelevent. Second, take a good read of R v. Massey, you'll find "drive" an unregistered vehicle, along with imprudently. You''ll also find that these are offenses under the Manitoba Highway Traffic Act, not the Criminal Code. Keep looking though, everyone needs a hobby.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

You said, in so many words, "Inaction is not action and therefore can never be actus rea," following it with "No intent is ever present with inaction and therefore there is no mens rea." Both are wrong. I have provided counterexamples for both.

You're taking liberties, I think I used a few more words than that. And no you haven't.

 

[TenPenny]

The truth of the matter is, yes, a mother will be convicted of a crime if her child isn't wearing a seatbelt and an accident occurs, logically resulting in that child's death.

Further, you will be convicted (on summary conviction, don't blame me if you don't know the difference) if you are driving an unregistered vehicle.

So, as usual, you have no point. Don't blame me if you cannot synthesise information. I mean, you cannot even fathom the thought that I might be Canadian yet live in Berlin. You're just small minded it seems.

I think the issue is your definition of being convicted of a crime. Driving an unregistered vehicle will put you on the wrong end of our justice system, but is not typically a crime. It is an offense.

A crime is a violation of a law that prohibits specific activities and for which a punishment is set out by the state. In Canada, only offences defined in federal law can actually be called "crimes." Offences covered by provincial or municipal law and for which there is a punishment are called "penal offences."

 

[AnnaG]

I cannot believe that the gun registry, as implemented, was anything more than a way to hire 'consultants' on large contracts and funnel millions of dollars to FOTL (friends of the Liberals), (see also the Ontatio eHealth initiative).

I could believe that of aPAULing Martin, but not Alan Rockhead. He's not that bright.

 

[Francis2004]

This really irks me.. On something I strongly agree on with the Conservatives of late, Peter Van Loan withheld what could be a crucial public report prior to this vote. This could basically tie this new legislation into all sorts of stupid panels that could end up killing this bill should it not clear all the levels required AGAIN..

Regardless of what Minister Van Loan thinks, why would he even consider jeopardizing this legislation unless it is for political gain.. :angryfire::angryfire::angryfire:

OTTAWA — Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan attempted to undermine a report to Parliament on the federal gun registry Thursday -- calling into question the agenda of its authors after refusing to make the report public before a crucial parliamentary vote.

The 2008 annual assessment of the Canadian Firearms Program by the RCMP will be tabled Friday, said Van Loan, 48 hours after the Conservatives won a vote in the House of Commons on legislation that would kill the federal long-gun registry.

Under intense questioning, the minister refused to say how long he's had the report.

Instead, Van Loan claimed to have new statistics -- not included in the report -- that show the long-gun portion of the registry is relatively seldom used by police.

By Van Loan's account, only 2.4 per cent of the 3.5 million police checks of the registry last year were specific to long guns, although even that slim proportion would amount to more than 80,000 long-gun checks.

He questioned why those numbers won't be in the annual report tabled Friday.

"That information was not put there by the people at the National Firearms Registry so you should ask them why that information wasn't there," said Van Loan. "We've gone and got that information."

He said the report was prepared "to justify the existence" of the firearms centre, and suggested parliamentarians really don't need to read it because it shows the same thing as previous years.

CTV News | Minister grilled over release of a gun registry report

 

[FiveParadox]

We can bet that the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, and the Honourable the Senate of Canada, are going to have a lot of questions and discussions on the topic of that withheld report. Trust Her Majesty’s Government for Canada to tell our representatives that they don’t need to read a statutory report to be better informed before a parliamentary vote, of course. Just wait for the Senate to gets its hands on that report, that should make for some interesting committee discussions when this bill makes it to the Upper House.

 

[Colpy]

We can bet that the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, and the Honourable the Senate of Canada, are going to have a lot of questions and discussions on the topic of that withheld report. Trust Her Majesty’s Government for Canada to tell our representatives that they don’t need to read a statutory report to be better informed before a parliamentary vote, of course. Just wait for the Senate to gets its hands on that report, that should make for some interesting committee discussions when this bill makes it to the Upper House.

The unfortunate thing is that the report makes absolutely no difference in the real world.

The vast majority of hits are simply to record transfers etc etc etc, standard house-keeping that has no effect on actual crime or the prevention thereof......

in fact, the Toronto police dep't is currently using the system in an all-around fishing expedition, a witch-hunt against folks that are not dangerous, but that dare own firearms in defiance of Mr. Miller and Mr. Blair's dream of a gun-free Toronto.......arresting gentlemen and seizing extremely valuable collections because the expiry date on their licence had slipped by un-noticed.

Don't you think these guys should have better things to do with their time? like arresting store owners that dare defend their livelyhood by making citizen's arrest???????????:roll:

 

[Francis2004]

The unfortunate thing is that the report makes absolutely no difference in the real world.

The vast majority of hits are simply to record transfers etc etc etc, standard house-keeping that has no effect on actual crime or the prevention thereof......

If so, why did Van Loan keep it secret from the House ? If the report makes absolutely difference then why jeopardize any chance of getting the legislation thru the House and Senate as quick as possible.. :angryfire:

Stupidity of for personal gain ?

 

[Colpy]

If so, why did Van Loan keep it secret from the House ? If the report makes absolutely difference then why jeopardize any chance of getting the legislation thru the House and Senate as quick as possible.. :angryfire:

Stupidity of for personal gain ?

In politics, appearances are everything.......the other side would have made hay of 1000 hits a day....without any reference to the real reason for them

we need to kill this legislation, and dumping the registration of long guns is a good first step.

Any law that makes criminals out of hundreds of thousands of Canadians for no significant improvement to public safety needs to be abolished.

WAYYY too much law out there.

 

[FiveParadox]

You don’t have a problem with the Government saying “You don’t need the facts before you vote?”

“We’ve had the report forever, but you guys can’t see it until after the vote?”

I can guarantee that this is going to cause problems in passing this legislation.

 

[Francis2004]

In politics, appearances are everything.......the other side would have made hay of 1000 hits a day....without any reference to the real reason for them

we need to kill this legislation, and dumping the registration of long guns is a good first step.

Any law that makes criminals out of hundreds of thousands of Canadians for no significant improvement to public safety needs to be abolished.

WAYYY too much law out there.

I disagree.. Any withheld crucial public report prior to this vote now damages our chances of having this legislation go thru fast and having our wish of abolishing the gun registry as quick as possible. This was pure stupidity..

 

[Colpy]

You don’t have a problem with the Government saying “You don’t need the facts before you vote?”

“We’ve had the report forever, but you guys can’t see it until after the vote?”

I can guarantee that this is going to cause problems in passing this legislation.

I actually doubt this legislation will ever make it all the way through.......gov'ts are loathe to surrender power, and I bet this dies on the vine.......before it gets voted on again......

However, if it DOES get back to the voting stage, this report will be so far in the past no one will give a rat's ass.

It will not be a factor. It is old news that there are vast numbers of hits anyway......that's how I know what they are for........

 

[bobnoorduyn]

I disagree.. Any withheld crucial public report prior to this vote now damages our chances of having this legislation go thru fast and having our wish of abolishing the gun registry as quick as possible. This was pure stupidity..

Who knows if this was political gamesmanship, whether it was intentional or an error, or just deemed irrelevent. What should be also known is that it was falsehoods, misinformation, embellishment and even outright misrepresentation of statistics, so much so that the then commissioner of the RCMP tried to enlighten the then Liberal governement of these lies, that got this sordid legislation pushed through in the first place. That and the nearly $400,000 given to Weny Cukier's group by the Liberals group to come up with arguments to lobby this same government to pass this totalitarian piece of legislation.

I fear Colpy may be correct that this bill will fail to pass through the senate, I sure hope we're wrong though.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

Just to mention how lopsided this issue is, a couple of years ago I recieved an online survey commissioned by Stockwell Day regarding if and how I would like to see changes in the firearms legisaltion. The questions themselves were telling. They ranged in scope from what should be asked on license applications to what penalties should be considered for offenders. I doubt that is was the government that worded the questions but rather a consulting firm with a neoprohibitionist bent. Many were negative option questions, much like have you stopped beating your wife. There was at least the option to leave a comment, so I commented on the tone of the questions.

The most telling were the recipients of this survey. Most were to womens' groups, victims' groups, doctors' groups, with very few going to ones who have any actual experience such as firearms groups or police unions. Oddly, I was the only member of our club's executive to receive this survey. Much of what I suggested and the answers I chose are the same views shared by most firearms users and clubs. These views made it to parlaiment so I can only assume that apathy on the part of the prohibitionists played a large part in the results.

 

[Nuggler]

From its inception, the gun registration bill has been punitive.

It was conceived in a knee jerk reaction to a terrible day in Montreal, and led Allen Rock to believe he might make political gain from the death of 13? women.

We (gun owners) were led to believe it would be an easy, fast, way to "help police" and society by putting the serial numbers of our long guns in a registry.

Well, it was neither fast, nor helpful. I did everything right when registering my existing guns at that time, and had to do it twice. Go figure.

Then, we were told it was going to cost us $80.00 PER GUN every FIVE YEARS, to keep legal and keep our guns registered. To a gun collector with modest means this sounded a death knell to his collection. At the time I had 10 rifles and shotguns, all safely kept in a locked metal safe which was built into a closet. Not being prepared to spend $800.00 every five years just to be a good guy, I sold them all but one.

Some just refused to register and became criminals, subject to fines and jail time, and some handed their guns in to the police for destruction. This, I believe, was the reason behind the fee in the first place.

In theory, the registry is supposed to help police by letting them know if a person has guns in his house, if the cops are investigating a "domestic" or what have you. I thought they were supposed to ASSUME every situation was potentially dangerous and act accordingly.

The long gun registry can be hacked, to let crooks know who has the guns and where they live. It's been done. So much for security.

In short this has been an expensive exercise in boondoggle, and a potential launching pad for Mr. Rock, who has since been relegated to the boondocks; where he rightly belongs IMHO.

I would have no problem with a QUICK, FREE, SECURE, long gun registration. Impossible to get in any top heavy bureaucratic government, where political expediency trumps personal freedoms.

Hoping this bill gets quick passage and becomes law. Too much to ask for I'm afraid.

 

[Liberalman]

Committee will kill the private members bill.