[bootlegga]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

bootlegga bootlegga:

I'm sick of it too, but more sick of hearing about how the a registry will lead to confiscation.

You may be sick of it yet the fact remains that registration is a necessary precursor to confiscation. One of the best ways to avoid a confiscation problem is not to facilitate it in the first place.

Given that no registry scheme has ever reduced crime then the only logical reason for implementing such a costly scheme is to facilitate an eventual confiscation.

Just because something is possible does NOT mean it will happen. There's a chance that earth will be destroyed by an asteroid in 2036, but that doesn't mean it guaranteed to happen, which is how gun registry opponents make it sound.

It's nothing more than fear-mongering at its best.

[BartSimpson]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Just because something is possible does NOT mean it will happen. There's a chance that earth will be destroyed by an asteroid in 2036, but that doesn't mean it guaranteed to happen, which is how gun registry opponents make it sound.

It's nothing more than fear-mongering at its best.

You're pretty ignorant of recent Canadian history.

The 1995 Canadian Firearms Act banned classes of guns and the registration rolls were used to effect confiscation of what had previously been legal guns.

That's not 'fear-mongering', that's a fact.

The fact of the handgun confiscations is what led long gun owners to tell your government to piss off when it wanted to register long guns. It's a real bugger for the anti-gun crowd to find unregistered firearms.

Which is why people like me oppose registration schemes. See, it's a lot easier to shoot liberals if they aren't able to seize your guns.

[ASLplease]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Just because something is possible does NOT mean it will happen. ....
It's nothing more than fear-mongering at its best.

You should apply that thinking every time someone claims that a properly licenced, properly trained, conscientiously safe and cautious gun owner can still accidentally kill someone with their firearm.

[BartSimpson]

ZING!

[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Just because something is possible does NOT mean it will happen. There's a chance that earth will be destroyed by an asteroid in 2036, but that doesn't mean it guaranteed to happen, which is how gun registry opponents make it sound.

It's nothing more than fear-mongering at its best.

You're pretty ignorant of recent Canadian history.

The 1995 Canadian Firearms Act banned classes of guns and the registration rolls were used to effect confiscation of what had previously been legal guns.

That's not 'fear-mongering', that's a fact.

The fact of the handgun confiscations is what led long gun owners to tell your government to piss off when it wanted to register long guns. It's a real bugger for the anti-gun crowd to find unregistered firearms.

Which is why people like me oppose registration schemes. See, it's a lot easier to shoot liberals if they aren't able to seize your guns.

It's also exactly what happened recently in Ontario. People who failed to renew their licence found the police knocking at their door with either a hefty fine, jail time or a combination - or confiscation on the spot. (Ontario is in Canada, for those of you just joining us at home)

bootlegga bootlegga:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I can buy a vehicle, keep it on my 10,000 acre private farm and never have to register or insure it, because it will never see public roads. And by not registering it, I would not automatically be a criminal.

Yes, and if someone goes to your farm and steals it, then the police have no way to even know where it came from (or possibly return your property to you - although admittedly a stolen gun used in crime likely wouldn't be returned). And without insurance, you also have to replace it yourself.

I'm sure people do this all the time, but that still doesn't make it right any more than cheating on your taxes does.

Ok, I'll bite. How does buying a vehicle and never registering it become 'not right'? You do know that farm insurance covers farm vehicles, right? And most stolen vehicles on public streets are never recovered anyhow, even if police investigate thefts from farms. That's why in Alberta the trend is toward double barrelled security systems.

[QBC]

Okay, here it is ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls. God doesn't believe in gun control...

I KNEW IT!!!!

http://gunowners.org/fs9902.htm

[bootlegga]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Just because something is possible does NOT mean it will happen. There's a chance that earth will be destroyed by an asteroid in 2036, but that doesn't mean it guaranteed to happen, which is how gun registry opponents make it sound.

It's nothing more than fear-mongering at its best.

You're pretty ignorant of recent Canadian history.

The 1995 Canadian Firearms Act banned classes of guns and the registration rolls were used to effect confiscation of what had previously been legal guns.

That's not 'fear-mongering', that's a fact.

The fact of the handgun confiscations is what led long gun owners to tell your government to piss off when it wanted to register long guns. It's a real bugger for the anti-gun crowd to find unregistered firearms.

Which is why people like me oppose registration schemes. See, it's a lot easier to shoot liberals if they aren't able to seize your guns.

The 1995 Firearms Act banned guns. Really...well, let's take a look shall we;

$1:

PURPOSE

Purpose
4. The purpose of this Act is
(a) to provide, notably by sections 5 to 16 and 54 to 73, for the issuance of

(i) licences, registration certificates and authorizations under which persons may possess firearms in circumstances that would otherwise constitute an offence under subsection 91(1), 92(1), 93(1) or 95(1) of the Criminal Code,

(ii) licences and authorizations under which persons may possess prohibited weapons, restricted weapons, prohibited devices and prohibited ammunition in circumstances that would otherwise constitute an offence under subsection 91(2), 92(2) or 93(1) of the Criminal Code, and

(iii) licences under which persons may sell, barter or give cross-bows in circumstances that would otherwise constitute an offence under subsection 97(1) of the Criminal Code;
(b) to authorize,

(i) notably by sections 5 to 12 and 54 to 73, the manufacture of or offer to manufacture, and

(ii) notably by sections 21 to 34 and 54 to 73, the transfer of or offer to transfer,

firearms, prohibited weapons, restricted weapons, prohibited devices, ammunition and prohibited ammunition in circumstances that would otherwise constitute an offence under subsection 99(1), 100(1) or 101(1) of the Criminal Code; and
(c) to authorize, notably by sections 35 to 73, the importation or exportation of firearms, prohibited weapons, restricted weapons, prohibited devices, ammunition, prohibited ammunition and components and parts designed exclusively for use in the manufacture of or assembly into automatic firearms in circumstances that would otherwise constitute an offence under subsection 103(1) or 104(1) of the Criminal Code.

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/F-11.6/pa ... rbo-ga:s_4

A full PDF file is available here;

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/PDF/Statute/F/F-11.6.pdf

Hmmm, I don't see anything in there about banning any weapons, just that the Firearms Act discusses the issuing of licenses, transportation, for firearms and crossbows in Canada. Admittedly I didn't read the entire 60-70 pages, I just scanned the document. However, if you can find a section that calls for the banning of a weapon class (don't bother looking for automatic weapons because they were prohibited long before 1995), I'll concede the point.

[bootlegga]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

bootlegga bootlegga:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I can buy a vehicle, keep it on my 10,000 acre private farm and never have to register or insure it, because it will never see public roads. And by not registering it, I would not automatically be a criminal.

Yes, and if someone goes to your farm and steals it, then the police have no way to even know where it came from (or possibly return your property to you - although admittedly a stolen gun used in crime likely wouldn't be returned). And without insurance, you also have to replace it yourself.

I'm sure people do this all the time, but that still doesn't make it right any more than cheating on your taxes does.

Ok, I'll bite. How does buying a vehicle and never registering it become 'not right'? You do know that farm insurance covers farm vehicles, right? And most stolen vehicles on public streets are never recovered anyhow, even if police investigate thefts from farms. That's why in Alberta the trend is toward double barrelled security systems.

I guess I should have said illegal instead of "not right".

However, justifying an action because "it happens all the time" or "everyone else is doing" doesn't justify an action or make any action legal. Try that in court the next time you get caught speeding and the judge will laugh your ass out of the courtroom.

[DrCaleb]

bootlegga bootlegga:

I guess I should have said illegal instead of "not right".

However, justifying an action because "it happens all the time" or "everyone else is doing" doesn't justify an action or make any action legal. Try that in court the next time you get caught speeding and the judge will laugh your ass out of the courtroom.

But it's not illegal, you are just trying to 'make' it illegal, just like the gun registry did.

There is no requirement to insure and register a vehicle you buy. You only need those things to run it on PUBLIC roads. If you want to run it on PRIVATE roads, say a logging road or on the private land of a farm, you don't need those things.

And it does happen all the time. I can speed all I like on private land, otherwise you'd see photo radar vans at the Indy race. Everyone else was doing it, after all.

[BartSimpson]

bootlegga bootlegga:

I guess I should have said illegal instead of "not right".

However, justifying an action because "it happens all the time" or "everyone else is doing" doesn't justify an action or make any action legal. Try that in court the next time you get caught speeding and the judge will laugh your ass out of the courtroom.

"Everyone is doing it" is, indeed, a sound defense for speeding. All you do is argue that you 1) were not passing other vehicles and that 2) driving at the speed limit would've been a greater hazard to your safety and the safety of other people on the road by your impeding the prevailing flow of traffic.

That got me off of a costly ticket in 1991 when I was pulled over for 65 on Interstate 5 when the speed limit was 55. I argued that I was actually going slower than most of the other cars and the cop conceded that. Turned out he pulled me over primarily because I was driving an older, dirty car and he felt I amy have been doing something else. The lesson there was to always keep my car clean, which I do, and I've never had another ticket since.

[ASLplease]

Bart, I wish there were more police like the one you met. sounds like reasonable is in his vocabulary

[andyt]

ASLplease ASLplease:

Bart, I wish there were more police like the one you met. sounds like reasonable is in his vocabulary

You want police to profile older dirty car drivers? In Vancouver the gangsters seem to mostly drive blingmobiles - I want the cops to go after them. Even the trio that abducted, an old man, pepper sprayed him and hit him over the head with a pipe were driving a late model pickup. All that just for his wallet. The dirty, older car is probably driven by some working poor person working 3 jobs and too busy to wash his/her car.

[BartSimpson]

ASLplease ASLplease:

Bart, I wish there were more police like the one you met. sounds like reasonable is in his vocabulary

He was a California Highway Patrol officer (our equivalent of Provincial Police) and, in general, they're definitive professionals.

[BartSimpson]

andyt andyt:

ASLplease ASLplease:

Bart, I wish there were more police like the one you met. sounds like reasonable is in his vocabulary

You want police to profile older dirty car drivers? In Vancouver the gangsters seem to mostly drive blingmobiles - I want the cops to go after them. Even the trio that abducted, an old man, pepper sprayed him and hit him over the head with a pipe were driving a late model pickup. All that just for his wallet. The dirty, older car is probably driven by some working poor person working 3 jobs and too busy to wash his/her car.

Like it or not, a dirty car is a cop magnet. And if keeping my 2007 Volvo S80 as shiny as a new penny is what it takes to save me $$ on speeding tickets then so be it.

I'll let the guy with the filthy 1986 Chevy Caprice argue about his civil rights in front of a traffic judge.

[bootlegga]

ASLplease ASLplease:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Just because something is possible does NOT mean it will happen. ....
It's nothing more than fear-mongering at its best.

You should apply that thinking every time someone claims that a properly licenced, properly trained, conscientiously safe and cautious gun owner can still accidentally kill someone with their firearm.

Tell ya what, when you apply the same rationale to the gun registry (or gun laws in general), then I'll consider it!