Gun Registry poll on tbnewswatch.com

[Buck 120 32]

If you support removing the gun registry for long rifles, go to http://tbnewswatch.com/ and have your say.

Their poll of the day is:

Do you believe MPs should vote for legislation that would see the abolishment of the long-gun registry?

So far 202 votes. Once you vote you will see the results of the poll.

[Bill Arnott 2]

82% Yes so far.

>Bill

[Guest Nonus]

I voted NO, the gun registry stops crime. Without it criminals will run rampant through the streets and complete and utter chaos will ensue.

I am kidding, the next of many votes is tomorrow. You can also see how everyone votes and if the two local NDP members of parliament go against their own word ...

[Guest BPangler]

They said on the news that the gun registry has not rate of crime, and it's just a big waste of money i can see registing your restricted firearms but your rifles come on now. Most of the illegal guns used by gangs or criminals they’re never going to register their guns anyway obviously,. "This current bill penalizes and hassles the legal hunter, trapper, farmer and it does little if anything to protect…general society from firearm abuses."

[Guest Nonus]

How is a restricted firearm any different than a non-restricted? Most hunter's rifles have a far greater stopping power than restricted firearm.

Get rid of the registry, bring back the piece of paper that says you can own firearms, remove magazine restrictions, legalize silencers and implement open/concealed carry.

The gun registry is useless, waste of money and a waste of time. Want to stop crime then go after criminals instead of making new criminals out of law abiding citizens.

[Guest Matt M]

How is a restricted firearm any different than a non-restricted? Most hunter's rifles have a far greater stopping power than restricted firearm.

Get rid of the registry, bring back the piece of paper that says you can own firearms, remove magazine restrictions, legalize silencers and implement open/concealed carry.

The gun registry is useless, waste of money and a waste of time. Want to stop crime then go after criminals instead of making new criminals out of law abiding citizens.

Many restricted firearms are easy to conceal, auto-repeating, and have large capacity magazines. I would think that makes them alot different than a non restricted firearm like a hunting rifle that only has a 3-4 shot capacity and are slower to reload. Restricted firearms are also the weapons of choice for robberies, gun fights and gang members. Even though a hunting rifle has more stopping power, I doubt you will see a guy hold up a bank with a 300 Win Mag when something like a sub machine gun or semi auto pistol is more practical. So it's obvious there is a big difference between the two.

And for the comment about removing magazine restrictions, legalizing silencers, and implementing an open/conceal carry policy, I'm going to assume you were either drunk or not thinking about what you were typing.

I agree on removing the gun registry, a waste of time and money for honest people.

[Guest]

HAH, that post made me laugh. Auto-repeating, OMG a semi automatic firearm is what I hope you are talking about, if you are talking about fully automatic then you have your facts wrong. No restricted firearm is fully automatic. I can hunt with a repeating firearm, there are many that are popular for use especially a shotgun for duck hunting.

Large capacity magazines, again I laugh at that, there are only normal capacity magazines. You are limited to 2 rounds in the magazine and one in the chamber by hunting regulations only. For firearms you are allowed unlimited rounds in bolt action, pump action and any unrestricted .22s. For semi automatic firearms you are limited to 5 and for pistols you are limited to 10.

Yeah sure "sub machine guns" and "semi auto pistols" are more practical, yet do any of them go through the legal means of acquiring said firearm? No so how does banning law abiding citizens, such as myself, help deter crime in any ways. I would like to see some gang banger commit an armed robbery if concealed or open carry were allowed, it would be ridiculous.

No I am not drunk and yes I do know what I was thinking about. Stop getting your facts from movies or antis with their head so far up their asses that they can see what they ate last night. Magazine restrictions solve nothing for target shooters other than the pain in the rear end of having to get a rivet placed in their magazine by the manufacture. Anyone can easily remove that so why even bother having them in the first place. Silencers would be a god send for anyone, it should be required like most places in Europe for health and safety. It reduces the noise so you don't go deaf hunting, also it cuts down on noise pollution.

Open/concealed carry would be the best thing that any government can do. Cops are so far and few between and their numbers keep getting smaller and smaller. Why would I call 911 and wait 3 minutes for a cop to come save my life when I would be dead in 10 seconds? If I have a means to defend myself, my family and anyone else in the public I would do so. In the states they have seen a huge drop in crime in CCW/OC states. Like I said above, robbers want easy money, why risk your life for a couple bucks when you can go rob someone who would rather not carry? I have a right to live and therefore I should have the right to defend myself.

I agree on removing the gun registry, the whole god damn thing. Waste of time for everyone in this country. Don't forget that handguns have been registered since the 30s and that won't ever change. You could hunt with them before the 70s and there was never a problem.

Get your facts straight please, shouting out anti propaganda won't get anything done and will make things works.

I am a avid gun lover, I do not rob banks or hold up people for drug money, so don't place me in the same category.

[Guest Matt M]

Alright, can you show me where in my post that I refered to you as a bank robber or a drug addict, or somehow I put you in the same category as them? You will be lookinbg for a long time because I never once did this. While you are at it, point out where I was shouting out anti propaganda. I never said anything that was "anti gun". All I tried to do was point out that there is a big difference between restricted and non-restricted firearms, otherwise they wouldn't be in different categories.

"Large capacity magazines, again I laugh at that, there are only normal capacity magazines"

So a banana clip that can hold a box of shells is the same as a 3 shot clip from a hunting rifle? That's what I was getting at.

If you are worried about going deaf hunting or target shooting, wear hearing protection, that's why they sell them at almost all hunting and gun stores. I have done alot of duck and big game hunting and I'm not deaf. Legalizing silencers is not the smartest thing.

I think you are the one who needs to get their facts straight

[Guest]

There isn't a big difference between restricted and non restricted. A shotgun that is 27 inches is non restricted, a shotgun that is the exact same but 2 inches shorter, that is restricted. No huge difference there.

Most restricted firearms are restricted cause they "look bad", does the same thing as everything else and only cause it looks bad is cause it is restricted. Most guns that are banned are just cause of the same thing. All the bad guys use AK47s in the movies and so they are bad, same goes as the Spas12, just complete nonsense.

Also they are magazines not clips. I never said that you should let people walk around with 50 round drums of 12 gauge and blast ever bird out of the sky. I think the hunting regulations are good cause they stop that spray and pray. Obviously you are not a target shooter, if you were then you would know what I am talking about. The only difference between a legal shooter and an illegal shooter is a 2 cent rivet that limits a magazine to 5 rounds. It is just a way to slowly take something away from avid shooters one small thing at a time.

I do wear hearing protection and I still would with a suppressor. It doesn't make the gun silent like the movies (again the reason why they are banned) it just reduced the noise. Ranges use to be out of town and out of the way of people. However now that people creep in closer and then they Arf Arf about the noise. The range was there a lot longer than the people. Suppressors would be an excellent compromise. Like I said before, most European countries do in fact require then for health and safety. A car has a muffler to reduce noise, so how is that any different?

Again, just cause you have your ways set doesn't mean that they are indeed fact. Go read some gun facts you will be surprised.

If it were up to the politicians, the police and most of the people in this country they would be happy to end up like Britain. Complete gun ban, CCTV cameras up the wazoo and rampant crime everywhere.

[Guest biz_514]

Q. What is the maximum number of cartridges that a firearm magazine can legally hold

* 5 cartridges for most magazines designed for a semi-automatic centre-fire long gun; or

* 10 cartridges for most handgun magazines

ht*tp://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/faq/index-eng.htm#a3

You'll see ads for 5/20 etc. meaning it's a 20-round mag pinned to 5.

Matt M:

Many restricted firearms are easy to conceal, auto-repeating, and have large capacity magazines.

So a banana clip that can hold a box of shells is the same as a 3 shot clip from a hunting rifle? That's what I was getting at.

They may look and originally be large capacity but they are pinned to 5. Anything not pinned to 5 is illegal. When I see an SKS decked out to look 'mean' with a big mag and rails and accessories I know in my heart it's stll stuck to 5 shots and likely shooting mil surp (cheap) ammo on the weekends. It's a $250 import with a good $500+ added on top like that Mazda Protoge I saw with the $4000 stereo system recently.

Matt M: And for the comment about removing magazine restrictions, legalizing silencers, and implementing an open/conceal carry policy, I'm going to assume you were either drunk or not thinking about what you were typing.

I am not trying to be critical here, but look outside the box. If you feel 'protected' because you 'just hunt' with your firearms you may one day be in for a big surprise. You may already assume you have more rights than the law 'permits' you. Nobody here is sounding off on a personal thing. We should all stand together.