Iggy to Whip Gun Registration Bill
- Thread starter Colpy
- Start date
It should also be noted that the Conservative Party is not proposing the abolish the entire gun registry, but rather, exclusively the long-gun portion; as mentioned by Canada’s auditor general, this would save only three million dollars per year.
The point is that the database is accessed thousands of times a day, and is defended by the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police; surely if Conservatives are shouting from the rooftops that the database doesn’t help police, we should be looking to the opinion of our police forces? If our chiefs of police think that the database is assisting our police officers, then the three million is absolutely worth it.
Sounds like this Registry is accessed whether an Officer wants to access it
or not, through a cross reference. Does that accessing mean anything if
it doesn't contribute to law enforcement in any significant way?
I'm on the outside looking in on this one. I'm assuming the Police Chief's are
Political animals to some extent, and that might dictate their stance on the
subject. What do the rank & file Officers say? Is that info out there that
someone has already stumbled across?
If the fee's for this Registry are dropped, whether or not it actually works (which
seems to be debatable or this Thread wouldn't exist), how would this program
be funded in the future if Ignatius gets his way?
EDIT to add from the O.P. Link:
Given that, Mr. Ignatieff, says a Liberal government would not scrap the registry but a first-time failure to register firearms would be treated as a “non-criminal, ticketing offence.” Currently, it is a criminal offence. The Liberals would permanently eliminate fees for new licenses, renewals and upgrades and they would streamline the paperwork.
Huh...so, what would fund this thing?
or not, through a cross reference. Does that accessing mean anything if
it doesn't contribute to law enforcement in any significant way?
I'm on the outside looking in on this one. I'm assuming the Police Chief's are
Political animals to some extent, and that might dictate their stance on the
subject. What do the rank & file Officers say? Is that info out there that
someone has already stumbled across?
If the fee's for this Registry are dropped, whether or not it actually works (which
seems to be debatable or this Thread wouldn't exist), how would this program
be funded in the future if Ignatius gets his way?
EDIT to add from the O.P. Link:
Given that, Mr. Ignatieff, says a Liberal government would not scrap the registry but a first-time failure to register firearms would be treated as a “non-criminal, ticketing offence.” Currently, it is a criminal offence. The Liberals would permanently eliminate fees for new licenses, renewals and upgrades and they would streamline the paperwork.
Huh...so, what would fund this thing?
Last edited:
Would you trust registration of your firearm to a retrieval system that can be hacked by a six-year-old?
But not by a lot of regular cops. Police chiefs are politicians and can get to the top using a variety of methods.; not all of which have to do with how much merit they have at actually being a police officer..
Nope. Like I said, a lot of regular cops don't think it's all that great.
Blair is either an idiot or a sycophantic liar...........and I assume he is not an idiot....the evidence points to the latter option.
CSSA: The Blair Witch-hunt Project -- Abuse of Authority?
At least Ignatieff took a stand on something - and is defining his position. It's a little too left for me tho..
The Police:
I used to work for an armoured car company, and as the local training officer, I had occasion to often deal with police on a professional basis, on the street and in liason with their training and range officers....
Although it was not a constant subject of discussion, the few officers I did discuss gun laws with unanimously thought the registration system was a farce......
And they are not alone...
http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/2010/978.pdf
I used to work for an armoured car company, and as the local training officer, I had occasion to often deal with police on a professional basis, on the street and in liason with their training and range officers....
Although it was not a constant subject of discussion, the few officers I did discuss gun laws with unanimously thought the registration system was a farce......
And they are not alone...
http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/2010/978.pdf
So....
Five out of eight Liberal members that voted to destroy the registry last time are unable to find their cojones this time.....and have said they will toe the party line....
Well, that is five seats that the Conservatives will do better in next time.....especially as two are in Newfoundland (with the highest rate of gun ownership in Canada) and one in the Yukon......
We can still dump it, as long as the village idiot, Jack Layton, doesn't decide to whip his caucus.......and I wouldn't bet on that!
I have it on good authority that Jack was on a radio program out west a couple of days ago, trying to sound like a good ole boy.......talking about how when he was a lad they kept a .22 for "shooting ducks"...LMAO!!!!.......difficult, to say the least, and very very illegal.......which led to this anonymous offering:
Come listen to a story 'bout Taliban Jack,
A phony little dipper with a commie in his sack,
And when one day he shot a teal or two,
The wardens bagged his arse 'cause he used a .22
Five out of eight Liberal members that voted to destroy the registry last time are unable to find their cojones this time.....and have said they will toe the party line....
Well, that is five seats that the Conservatives will do better in next time.....especially as two are in Newfoundland (with the highest rate of gun ownership in Canada) and one in the Yukon......
We can still dump it, as long as the village idiot, Jack Layton, doesn't decide to whip his caucus.......and I wouldn't bet on that!
I have it on good authority that Jack was on a radio program out west a couple of days ago, trying to sound like a good ole boy.......talking about how when he was a lad they kept a .22 for "shooting ducks"...LMAO!!!!.......difficult, to say the least, and very very illegal.......which led to this anonymous offering:
Come listen to a story 'bout Taliban Jack,
A phony little dipper with a commie in his sack,
And when one day he shot a teal or two,
The wardens bagged his arse 'cause he used a .22
Oh but Colpy, bureaucrats and pols (especially the Liberal ones) can't be wrong about anything. So the regular cops, the statistics, etc. must all be false.
The MPP for my district sent a letter to all households in the district on that vote to find the wishes of her constituents and on the first reading it seems she voted the right way....in the first reading.....
No no no, a thousand times again, NO!!! I have never, ever, nor have known anyone who has ever, ever seen a handgun, or any gun for that matter, commit a crime. People commit crimes, and they will use whatever is handy at the time.
The gliberals and their herds will believe anything, first they banned automatic firearms when there was never ever a case of one being used in a crime, except by a deranged soldier who used his GOVERNMENT ISSUED SMG to take over the Quebec legislature. (The use of smg's by the SDQ to shoot up a hotel room during a raid and killing two carpet layers while so doing, because they got the wrong room, was an "accident").
The banning of short barrelled handguns was anothter solution to a problem that didn't exist. They are of generally to low power and velocity to be of any use to anyone with real criminal intent and any knowledge of firearms.
The banning of certain firearms for no good reason only makes them more desireable for those who want status in having something no one else has. The other side of the coin is that while pistol gunshot wounds are highly survivable, shotguns, followed by rifles, deliver maximum trauma thus exponentially increasing the probablility of fatality. The whole thing is wrong headed anyway, either the politicians are exceedingly ignorant of ballistics, or their whole aim is to disarm the citizenry en masse, the latter being what I suspect.
Again, the argument that rifles are designed for hunting is wrong, they are designed for warfare and adapted for hunting. Pistols are designed for defense. They are still tools, where it may be not totally unreasonable to curse the hammer that whacks your own thumb, it is something beyond pure stupidity to curse the hammer that whack others' thumbs rather than the hand that weilds it.
Geez, Bob, you mean you are not happy that the gov't banned .25 ACPs and .32 caliber handguns?????
I mean just look at how much good it has done on the street.....now the crooks carry 9mm, .40 cals, .357 Magnums, or .45s.........a definite improvement!
Now if we could get THEM off the street, they could take up 12 gauge shotguns......and kill 5 times as many people.
I mean just look at how much good it has done on the street.....now the crooks carry 9mm, .40 cals, .357 Magnums, or .45s.........a definite improvement!
Now if we could get THEM off the street, they could take up 12 gauge shotguns......and kill 5 times as many people.
The point is that they are a political lobbying pressure group, but much unlike any others; police chiefs are beholden to those who employ them, the politicians, (sure we pay them but that's as far as it goes). Their opinion is less reliable than anyone elses' because they have a vested interest in a political agenda. Be very wary of the opinion of the brass, they aren't looking out for us, they aren't looking out for their subordinates, they are looking out for themselves, it is Management 101. When is the last time anyone in power did anything to usurp their own power in favour of those below them, and kept their job? The mere fact that they are in favour of this tells me that it is wrong.
After he had been President, Teddy Roosevelt was entering an auditorium to give a speech when a would-be assassin popped up out of the crowd and shot him in the chest. With a .32.
The bullet went through his spectacles case, and his notes for the speech, and into his chest.
Teddy decided that it was only a .32, it probably hadn't done that much damage, and went inside and gave a 90 minute speech, with blood seeping from his chest wound.
Then he went to the hospital.
They sure don't make Presidents like they used to.........