• Donate to T.B.F.

    T.B.F. is dependant on donations from users like you! Thank you to those that have made a donation! All donations go back into upgrading the site!


    25% of donation goal reached.
    Donate Sidebar by DevFuse
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

Guest Beamer

Petition to Scrap Long Gun Registry

Recommended Posts

Buck 120

Me too


Not just a 3 month season but a 12 month obsession!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seppi

I signed the petition for sho !!!!!

Seppi B)B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NWO Fishing Bum

Would I be correct in assuming everyone who signs has not registered their shotguns and rifles? Otherwise the money already spent registering them will have been a waste.

NWO Fishing Bum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Nonus

I have my stuff registered. It is a waste anyways and anyone who buys a firearm in the future will be a waste too.

The registry is a waste.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seppi

Just like voting in the Liberals at the time was a waste !!! Wait a minute,did I just go there !! LOL

I'm tired of being treated like a communist ,what happened to land of the free !

Seppi............Good comeback NONUS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Nonus

Now all we need is to derestrict the AR-15, allow normal capacity magazines, no more of this 5 round bull crud, allow the use of suppressors at the range to cut down noise pollution and ditch the registry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seppi

Amen brother !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NWO Fishing Bum

Like I said before, simply paying lip service...all posturing but no spine!

NWO Fishing Bum

Tories in no hurry to schedule vote on dismantling gun registry

JOAN BRYDEN AND BRUCE CHEADLE

The Canadian Press

April 21, 2009 at 4:01 AM EDT

OTTAWA — The Conservative government appears to be acknowledging its attempt to kill the long-gun registry is a lost cause.

Although the government introduced an unusual Senate bill to great fanfare earlier this month, an official in the office of Marjory LeBreton, the Conservative leader in the Senate, said there's no timetable for a vote on Bill S-5 in the Liberal-dominated chamber.

Liberals say the whole point of the exercise was political posturing rather than serious legislative change.

"The Liberals are opposed to it, so it's unlikely to move very much right now," Eli Schuster, Ms. LeBreton's communications adviser, said yesterday when asked about the status of S-5.

Asked why the government would introduce a bill it had no intention of pushing to a vote, Mr. Schuster abruptly ended the conversation.

Ms. LeBreton later sent an e-mail saying the bill would be sponsored by a Tory senator, would spawn a number of Senate speeches, and likely hearings with witnesses.

"All this to say it will probably be some time before it gets back to the Senate for third reading," Ms. LeBreton wrote.

Liberal MP Mark Holland, the party's public-safety critic, said he believes the Conservatives "are bound and determined to at least appear to be trying to get rid of the registry.

"They've got a problem with their base and they're trying to rev them up, trying to pretend they're killing the registry without really making a concerted effort to kill it."

Real or contrived, the government initiative is raising alarms. A group representing front-line police officers yesterday came out swinging against the Senate bill, saying it will compromise public safety.

The Canadian Police Association added that C-301, a private member's bill proposed by Tory MP Garry Breitkreuz, is even worse.

"We ... consider the licensing of firearms owners and the registration of firearms to be a valuable public-safety tool for front-line police officers," CPA president Charles Momy says in a letter to Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff.

"It would be irresponsible to suspend or abandon any element of this program now that it is starting to deliver the intended results. ... Bill S-5 and Bill C-301 will compromise public safety."

Mr. Ignatieff has said the Liberals will not support either bill, which virtually guarantees they'll never be enacted.

Until recently, the minority Conservative government had been backing Mr. Breitkreuz's bill, which would weaken controls on machine guns, in addition to scrapping the gun registry.

But amid criticism that the MP's bill went too far, the government proposed its own legislation via the odd route of the Senate, where Liberals hold an overwhelming majority. The government bill focuses strictly on abolition of the gun registry.

"I don't see it being approved by the Senate," said Mr. Holland.

"By the same token, we do have Mr. Brietkreuz's bill and the government will continue to try to find ways to stoke these flames and try to rile up their base.

"So I don't think we can just sit on the sidelines and just presume we don't need to worry about this thing."

The Tories have long contended the registry is a waste of taxpayers' money and does nothing to combat crime. Critics of the registry have characterized it as penalizing law-abiding long-gun owners, primarily hunters and rural residents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Patch

Articles like this always say something like "front-line police officers want registry". Guess what, I have spoken with plenty of coppers and not one of them rely on the registry for officer safety. They go into every single house with the thought that there are firearms in there. Every car they stop, they imagine the occupants are carrying. They'd be crazy to think otherwise!! Every one of those front line officers will tell you, if you had of put a $1,000,000,000 (!!!!) into policing/health care/education this country would be even greater than it already is.

The registry hasn't prevented any murders. Bad guys still carry. Hunters were made into criminals.

The whole point of the registry was safety and it failed. Why continue to put money into it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NWO Fishing Bum

Patch,

I agree with you to some extent, but completely disagree that outright scrapping the registry is the answer. It's not the 'article' saying police want the registry, rather the author is quoting a formal document from the Canadian Police Association.

"The registry hasn't prevented any murders....Hunters were made into criminals." Nonsense! The typical one-liners that if said often enough, soon become accepted. Your first statement cannot be measured empirically (i.e., there is no way to assess whether the actions of enformcement officers or others, knowing there are weapons registered to a given person or at a given location, vs. what they might otherwise have done, has saved lives, injuries, time, etc.). That can't be presented as a simple statistic(s). I do agree however with the Auditor General that a concentrated effort, gathering even qualitative data, to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the registry, in order to maximize it's benefit at a manageable cost, should be completed on an ongoing basis.

Here is a recent article, written by somebody formerly from NWO, on how police use the registry. The registry is just one of many tools for them.

http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/04/02/how-pol...e-gun-registry/

Hunters were not made into criminals with the registry, nor were any other gun-owners. Yes, some hunters have indeed been convicted of crimes (just like any other group or sociodemographic in society), and yes, some of those crimes were committed with their hunting shotguns and rifles. Hunters are not incapable of crime, nor are farmers, nor are gang members, nor are even police; the target has always been to increase knowledge of where/what guns are in our society, and as such, hunters and other gun owners have been asked to register their weapons--some time on paperwork and a small fee...boo-hoo.

The precedence for such an approach in our society is abundant. If you haven't already done so, you'll soon need to do some paperwork and pay a small fee to get a passport for entering the US. But why would you, a good law-abiding citizen, need a passport? The 'criminals' just won't bother getting a passport and cross the border at an uncontrolled location. And how much have you spent on registering your vehicles and plates over the years?...some paperwork and a fee (sounds kinda familiar)! But why? Registering vehicles hasn't eliminated automobile theft, nor has it prevented any vehicular accidents causing injury or death. The 'criminals' still drive cars. Delivery men, truckers, and law-abiding drivers were suddenly made into criminals. (Yeah, sounds stupid, but that is mainly because of the time lapsed since vehicle licensing and registration came into effect; in a generation the same common, perhaps still reluctant, acceptance will exist over gun registration).

And Patch, the cost of the registry is exorbitant. I'm fairly confident almost everybody would agree with you there. And much of that cost has returned insufficient results for society, due to problems with the registry's delivery and oversight, let slide under the guise of being 'for the safety of society.' Again, far from monumental when you talk about law enforcement and justice in our country--the guise of public safety has been used for sloppily spending public dollars time and again (and in the U.S. it's ten-fold+). But such ineffectiveness does not warrant outright scrapping the registry, which the Canadian Police Association, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, and several other bodies concerned with the rule of law, agree will reduce public safety! As you suggested, the 1,000,000,000+ public dollars into the registry would have been useful for education, health care, etc. I would agree! But you then noted the whole point of the registry was about safety. Again, I would agree. So Patch, if hypothetically you are the Minister of Public Safety in Canada, the question for you is 'How many Canadian lives would you trade for a $billion?' I'm just curious...how many? Because that is the question you would have to answer and defend if in that position of power over the situation.

I say let's keep the registry, keep the modest gains in public safety the police have noted, develop and implement a more comprehensive adaptive management framework, including research (not completed by police, but rather independent third-parties) with the main outcome to increase registry effectiveness and efficiency, continue to promote and provide for gun amnesty, intensively target handguns in cities, and continue to educate our children on gun awareness, gun safety, and gun control.

NWO Fishing Bum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Nonus

Bah, the registry is a waste, the only reason why some cops like it is cause they can be lazy about things instead of doing their job assuming everyone is armed. No where did you mention the fact that the registry has been hacked numerous times, now people know exactly where you live and what guns you have located in your house. It isn't hard to see what cars you have cause you can just drive by and take a gander. I personally would not like anyone, other than the people I tell, to know what I have.

If you look any the vast majority of gun related crimes you will see that very little have anything to do with a registered firearm. If it does the media will blow things out of proportion and then the joe blow Canadian will assume that the system works. It doesn't, if I wanted to commit a crime would I go through the entire hassle of getting my PAL, RPAL, background checks, personality checks, joining a range and then buying the handgun to commit the crime. Now I wouldn't, why would I put some much effort into something that I can just go grab for a couple bucks more from some gang or other crime related business. The same goes for the simple hunting rifle, would you do the same thing, no you would just go steal one.

I say ditch the registry, 100,000 bucks in health care would save more lives than 2 billion in the gun registry, just more of a pain for the fellow law abiding citizen to go through and pay for while the "gangster" just bypasses go and gets a slap on the wrist if caught. Just create new laws that will create a mandatory sentence for crimes commit with firearms, that simple.

Do not believe everything you read in the media, they don't know their rear end from a hole in the ground regarding firearms and like to make things sound far more life threatening than anything is. They are usually so vague about anything that you cannot draw any conclusions from. They also like to add on assault weapon to everything even though they have no idea what they are talking about.

Got interrupted by the phone and lost my rant thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NWO Fishing Bum

The same old arguments Nonus. Been there, done that! If I needed a car to commit a crime would I go get a driver's license, go get the car registered, get some plates, get a sticker for the plates, etc. No, I would just go steal a car! In fact, I would hack the vehicle registry first then go steal the exact model of car I wanted. Yet numerous bodies will tell us that licensing and registering vehicles make our streets safer, and that vehicle registration is used for far more than the everyday citizen knows (or is told). The same is true of registering firearms--to a law-abiding citizen/driver, the vehicle registry is a waste. Too bad everybody isn't a law-abiding citizen.

"Just create new laws that will create a mandatory sentence for crimes commit with firearms, that simple." No, it's not that simple, not at all! Mandatory minimum sentences have proven overwhelmingly to not deter crime whatsoever. Increased incarceration rates have done nothing but increase crime in the United States where they took that SIMPLE stance for years and have exacerbated, not helped, the problem! Minor felons tossed into jail in their late-teens only to emerge as pure, hardened criminals. Numerous ex-cons will tell you it's when they went to prison that they started their education in how to be a criminal! NO, it's prevention of crime that works-- Education and programs so that nobody feels the need to grab a gun and commit a crime in the first place! That's what makes our society safer. I realize it may be rather COMPLEX to understand how registering your firearms and the registry itself helps with crime prevention and education of gun owners.....simple things for simple minds: so goes the neo-conservative mantra.

Clearly, we don't agree! Glad we have the forum to lay out our different arguments...oh, wait a minute. We had to REGISTER to use this forum, didn't we Nonus? I know I'm not going to fill the board with advertising, or otherwise commit one of the deeds that led Roger to require everyone to register. Are you Nonus? So why are we good citizens required go through the hassle of filling out the registration page to use the board, when the 'forum gangsters' will just find some way around registration? Oh, geez, that darn registration, absolutely everywhere these days, eh Nonus.......maybe, just maybe, it's starting to seep in.

Simply (LOL),

NWO Fishing Bum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Patch

NWO,

My original post was about the front line officer. He/she uses all tools at their disposal such as CPIC and MTO information, and now CFRO information. It's there and it'd be silly not to use it. What I'm telling you though is the officers don't check the firearms registry and when the information comes back that he doesn't have any guns, the officers don't go; "Whew, safe to go in there!" They treat EVERY person as though they are armed, it's basic officer safety.

It's common practice with a lot of police services to automatically check the registry when officers run checks on anyone, hence the huge numbers mentioned in the Macleans article you referenced. Again, that's officers using all the tools at their disposal.

I wouldn't want to put a price on any person. I think any one of us would give any amount of money to keep someone we love alive. But governments make those sort of decisions every day when those choose to put money into one program and not another. I think the registry was a big mistake and the money should have been spent elsewhere. I think a billion dollars would have saved way more people if it was used for health care than for the registry.

That said, we have the registry now. So I hear your point about cars, passports and websites (lol). Totally scrapping it now? Probably not the best move. Continue to put billions into it? Also not a smart move. People wiser than me must come up with the solution.

As for Nonus' suggestion for more laws, I think we have enough laws, it's longer, tougher sentencing that we need. NWO, you mention the states, but keep in mind they have way more people in their country than ours, therefore more people go to jail. Crime prevention is huge and it does have it's place, but it's not the end all be all. When a bad guy uses a gun in a crime, he should go to jail for a long time. At least I know he won't be commiting any more gun related crimes while he's locked up. Do I think his dad should have spent more time with him when he was a kid? Sure. Do I think he should have had more opportunities while growing up in those formative years? Absolutely. But once that gun crime has been committed, lock him up. Have the government decide to toughen sentencing, educate the public about strict sentencing / mandatory lengthy sentences, maybe, just maybe that gangster will think twice about using that gun. If you look up a couple of his buddies for a decade or so for doing the same thing, is he going to take pause? I hope so.

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NWO Fishing Bum

Well said! Great debate. Now we'll see what they do....

NWO Fishing Bum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NWO Fishing Bum

Huh....did my letter get through?

NWO Fishing Bum

Rafferty skips vote on long-gun registry

By BRYAN MEADOWS

Thunder Bay Chronicle-Journal

Friday, April 24, 2009

Where was Thunder Bay-Rainy River MP John Rafferty?

That‘s what federal Conservatives are asking following a Bloc Quebecois motion in the House of Commons Wednesday, calling for support of the federal government‘s long-gun registry.

“Strangely, NDP MPs who previously promised their constituents that they would vote to scrap the gun registry all seemingly vanished, while others fell into line, swallowed their principles, and followed Jack Layton in supporting the gun registry,” Conservative party director of communications Ryan Sparrow said Thursday.

“Northern Ontarians are wondering, where was NDP MP John Rafferty, who promised to fight to scrap the gun registry, including promising to introduce his own bill to scrap the registry,” Sparrow said.

Approved by 143-136 margin, the opposition motion stated: “That, in the opinion of the House, the government shouldn‘t extend the amnesty on gun control requirements set to expire on May 16, 2009, and should maintain the registration of all types of firearms in its entirety.”

While not legally binding on the government, Sparrow said, it “clearly outlines each MPs‘ position on the registry.”

Sparrow noted that Rafferty was in Ottawa Wednesday, as he held a press conference earlier in the day on the forestry industry.

When reached Thursday afternoon, Rafferty said he didn‘t know why the Conservatives were so worried about his whereabouts.

“I wasn‘t in House (of Commons Wednesday), because I was busy with forestry business,” Rafferty said. “(The vote came) just before a CUPE meeting I had, and then I was meeting with (forestry) stakeholders all afternoon.”

Kenora MP Greg Rickford expressed disappointment that Northwestern Ontario NDP members, who in the past have supported ending the long gun registry, refused to take a stand for responsible gun owners by voting against the Bloc motion.

“I was very surprised that the Northwestern Ontario NDP members voted against extending amnesty for hunters, farmers, and particularly First Nations, where hunting is part of their livelihood,” Rickford said, adding that “one of them didn‘t even show up to vote on behalf of his constituents.”

Rickford suggested that “constituents in Northwestern Ontario want to see the end of the wasteful registry and they thought they had voted for candidates that would stand up for their needs and do the right thing.”

Rafferty said “it was a Bloc motion and it didn‘t mean anything.” But, he said, “it could have meant something” if the Conservatives would have made it a confidence motion.

“If the Conservatives are serious about getting rid of the long-gun registry then they would have made it a confidence motion. They didn‘t,” he said.

“I certainly felt yesterday that working through my portfolio on forestry was more important than voting on a Bloc motion.”

Rafferty said he is still committed to getting rid of the long-gun registry.

Thunder Bay-Superior North MP Bruce Hyer could not be reached for comment Thursday.

Earlier this month, the Conservative government introduced a bill in the Senate aimed at abolishing the federal long-gun registry.

Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan said the new legislation is identical to two bills tabled in the Commons before the last election but never passed. That means it will be confined exclusively to getting rid of the long-gun registry.

“It’s our hope we will be able, in this Parliament, to have support from the other parties,” said Van Loan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Nonus

Yeah noticed that on another site, that rear end, Hyers or whatever the other guy is missed the vote too. Yet they are for the dismantling of the registry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Resource Pimp

How bout sending him an e-mail and telling him his election promise wasn't worth the time it took to say it and you'll remember that the next election. Thats what I did. Tell your friends to do the same.

e-mail addy............ Rafferty.J@parl.gc.ca


"If people concentrated on the really important things in life, there'd be a shortage of fishing poles."

Click on banner to visit

Bedas Lodge.

bedaslogo.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Nonus

I didn't even vote for him.

I should say, I voted for you in the previous election and didn't vote for you this time, good thing I didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest PUKSHOT

Typical politician BS if you ask me. Honesty and politics don't mix.....you are either one or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.