Canada to Abolish Bill C-391 (Long Gun Registry)

[jonesbb630]

The federal long-gun registry moved one step closer to being abolished as MPs voted Wednesday in the House of Commons to scrap the controversial program.
With support from 18 Liberals and New Democrats, the private member's bill passed second reading 164-137, and now goes to committee.
If passed, Bill C-391 would scrap the decade-old registry and destroy existing data within the system on about seven million shotguns and rifles.

[mlschiestel]

i was reading about this and maybe i just don't know enought about this but is it really a good idea to get rid of the long gun registry? Is it really an inconvienence to register the gun (being as mine was registered for me when i bought it). Maybe someone could enlighten me but i seen adds from the government saying that its an inconvienence for hunters and people that live in rural areas. Well i am a hunter and i live in a rural area and it didn't really bother me to have to register my shotgun. So is it really a good idea? In 2007 the RCMP accessed the gun register database 2.5 million times so obviously its worth having.

[Unobtanium]

Sadly, gun registration seems to be a slippery slope. If it stopped there, I don't have a problem with it, but it never does.

[LeoAtrox]

I don't think registration or any other hoops governments make purchasers jump through is an inconveniece. I gladly submit to a background check. For a tool as valuable as a firearm, any person with the right priorities would go through any inconvenience to own one.

The problem is the registry itself. It is a gross violation of privacy, and a continuous threat to the right to own a firearm. Where there is a registry, there is a list of gun owners that could be used if confiscation were ever initiated. (In almost every case, confiscation has been the ultimate use of gun registry data.) At the very least, the data can be used to compromise the privacy and personal security of gun owners; like some local registries have in US.

While Canadians may or may not consider self-defense a right (never lived in Canada and haven't visited in the past 18 years, so I haven't got a finger on the "pulse" of the Canadian citizenry) most Americans do. The very idea of a gun registry sends chills down my spine. I hate thinking about the information the BAFTE already has that can tie firearms to their owners in the US.

[jonesbb630]

I was designed to lower gun crimes. It has grossly failed at the tune of Billions of dollars. Bottom line, a criminal will not stop and say: "I can't comitt a crime with this gun, it's registered. That sucks. I will have to find a gun that is not registered." The criminal will comitt the crime with the gun registered or not as he couldn't care less.

The registry has proven to be so unreliable that the RCMP would always go to a scene thinking there could be guns there even if the registry did not show it. 10,000 queries a a day might seem like a lot but the CPIC system was checked 392,000 times a day in 2007. In the same year the registry was checked 6,900 times a day.
That means when police are doing a search, they only check the registry 1.7% of the time. The government could not justify spending billions more for something that never worked.

[thebiggiantkevin]

I don't think govt gun registration databases can realistically be used to confiscate guns because so many guns are sold privately or stolen.

All my firearms have been bought from friends. Not to avoid govt lists or background checks - I just like buying slightly used firearms at half price :-)

Govt lists are obviously a waste of time and money (our tax money). They raise privacy concerns, and are likely unconstitutional. The lists and background checks are just a paper barrier put up to make anti-gun groups happy.

Kevin

[Reggio]

Originally Posted by LeoAtrox

I don't think registration or any other hoops governments make purchasers jump through is an inconveniece. I gladly submit to a background check. For a tool as valuable as a firearm, any person with the right priorities would go through any inconvenience to own one.

The problem is the registry itself. It is a gross violation of privacy, and a continuous threat to the right to own a firearm. Where there is a registry, there is a list of gun owners that could be used if confiscation were ever initiated. (In almost every case, confiscation has been the ultimate use of gun registry data.) At the very least, the data can be used to compromise the privacy and personal security of gun owners; like some local registries have in US.

While Canadians may or may not consider self-defense a right (never lived in Canada and haven't visited in the past 18 years, so I haven't got a finger on the "pulse" of the Canadian citizenry) most Americans do. The very idea of a gun registry sends chills down my spine. I hate thinking about the information the BAFTE already has that can tie firearms to their owners in the US.

An overwhleming majority of Cdns do NOT own guns for self defense... and most do not even consider it an option.

Unless you're living in rural Canada, (about 20% of the pop) the vast majority of Canadians are not very comfortable with guns in general.

It's more like Europe here in that people like the idea (in principle) of tight, restricted ownership and limited use of fire arms. Gun ownership in Canada per capita is much lower than the U.S.

In sum, the "right to bear arms" philosophy is very limited here...

hunting is also declining as as a recreational activity, although I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case in the U.S. as well...

[jonesbb630]

[QUOTE=Reggio;118379]An overwhleming majority of Cdns do NOT own guns for self defense... and most do not even consider it an option.

You would be surprised how many Canadians have a self defence firearms in their homes. Don't kid yourself on that.

[TerpX]

Originally Posted by jonesbb630

I was designed to lower gun crimes. It has grossly failed at the tune of Billions of dollars. Bottom line, a criminal will not stop and say: "I can't comitt a crime with this gun, it's registered. That sucks. I will have to find a gun that is not registered." The criminal will comitt the crime with the gun registered or not as he couldn't care less.

The registry has proven to be so unreliable that the RCMP would always go to a scene thinking there could be guns there even if the registry did not show it. 10,000 queries a a day might seem like a lot but the CPIC system was checked 392,000 times a day in 2007. In the same year the registry was checked 6,900 times a day.
That means when police are doing a search, they only check the registry 1.7% of the time. The government could not justify spending billions more for something that never worked.

Jones, thanks for filling in the gaps for those of us who weren't aware of the situation in Canada. I'm currently writing an english paper about gun control and was wondering where you got the 1.7% registry use data. I could really use it for the paper/argument and would like to cite it properly. Thanks and keep up the good work.

[tyson129]

Originally Posted by jonesbb630

I was designed to lower gun crimes. It has grossly failed at the tune of Billions of dollars. Bottom line, a criminal will not stop and say: "I can't comitt a crime with this gun, it's registered. That sucks. I will have to find a gun that is not registered." The criminal will comitt the crime with the gun registered or not as he couldn't care less.

The registry has proven to be so unreliable that the RCMP would always go to a scene thinking there could be guns there even if the registry did not show it. 10,000 queries a a day might seem like a lot but the CPIC system was checked 392,000 times a day in 2007. In the same year the registry was checked 6,900 times a day.
That means when police are doing a search, they only check the registry 1.7% of the time. The government could not justify spending billions more for something that never worked.

You couldn't be more right, it has cost the US public Billions of dollars and has not put any number of criminals behind bars that justify the cost. I am for background checks when buying through a dealer but am all for buying through friends, or other resources that do not use ffl transactions and receival or background checks. Sometimes people need to trust others, and when it comes to "hunting guns" there really shouldn't be a huge concern. Yes hunting weapons are designed for killing but not in a way that criminals desire (Most would rather have a pistol or sawed off piece of crap because most don't know what they are doing to begin with- its the sickos with brains you have to worry about )
It is amazing how much money is wasted on gun control issues like registration that could have gone to help people in need or education....it's a arse-backwards world (Country) we live in sometimes but in the end these regulations run their course when data proves them to be ineffective and/or useless in comparison to their cost. Fat Pockets with no Results IMO.