Gun registry math
by Aaron Wherry on Monday, August 23, 2010 12:32pm
When Bill c-391, an act to repeal the long-gun registry, came to a vote on second reading last November, it was passed by a count of 164-137. Those 164 votes in favour included 143 C
(Oh and AM...it is just you.... )
Just as long as c391 passes, I really don't care what scenario of math they use.
(Oh and AM...it is just you.... )
You probably don't want to hear things like this then...
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Pol ... story.html
http://www.sudburystar.com/Community/Ne ... px?c=64288
Canadian Shooting Sports Association Press Release. EPS Cst. Randy Kuntz Survey. Randy speaks.
Posted on August 20, 2010 by cgnnightmare
Officer�s survey finds 92% of police want gun registry scrapped
Veteran police officer says database is dangerous for cops to use
Vaughan ON � August 19, 2010 � A national survey conducted by an Edmonton police officer reveals that 92 percent of police officers in Canada want Members of Parliament to vote in favour of scrapping the long-gun registry in September.
Constable Randy Kuntz, a 22-year veteran with Edmonton Police Services (EPS), says the survey he conducted last year should be embraced by M.P.s when they vote on Bill C-391 that advocates dispatching the registry. Kuntz, an Exemplary Service Medal recipient, hopes to expose the grave mistake that the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP) is making by supporting the registry.
�The CACP is not some mindless group of misguided men and women who strive to oppress,� says Kuntz. �There are many things they do very well as a unit. They simply have this one matter very wrong. The idea that the firearms registry is necessary and useful is wrong. They claim that they speak for all police officers on this matter. I think I have shown that they don�t.�
Kuntz used a popular police magazine to query officers across Canada if they supported the registry as a useful working tool. While he is first to admit the survey is not scientific, he believes it closely reflects the current climate among his fellow officers.
He expected a couple of hundred replies, but of the 2,631 officers who responded from every province and territory, 2,410 said the registry is useless as a crime fighting tool and many believe it poses a danger to police.
�The firearms database shows registered firearms and their owners,� explains Kuntz. �No telling where those firearms are actually located, it just shows the law abiding citizen who owns legal firearms. There is nothing that says the firearms have to be in the possession of the person to whom they are registered. I can loan a firearm to anyone who possesses a valid license for that type of firearm.
�A person can have a valid possession/acquisition license, but not have any registered firearms in his name,� he adds. �So, no firearms are on the database associated to his address. But, he can borrow a firearm and have it in his possession. What good is the registry, then? In the above example, the police officer checks the person and sees he has no firearms registered to him � so does the policeman think there are no firearms? Probably. It�s a huge mistake on the police officer�s part, relying on a database for your safety. It�s ridiculous.�
Kuntz conducted the survey on his own because he was very concerned that officers could be killed if they relied on the registry data. He also believes the CACP is misrepresenting the facts by continually claiming that a massive majority of police officers support the registry. There is often a gulf between management and employee interests in any organization and police work is no different.
�The CACP tells the public that it is a necessary tool for law enforcement,� says Kuntz. �It is not It just gives the perception of that. It was pretty overwhelming that those who responded (to the survey) were against the registry. Most of the respondents were constables and sergeants/detectives � guys and gals with their boots on the pavement, so to speak. They�re the cops that the public meets and deals with on a daily basis. I respect Chief Rick Hanson of Calgary Police Services. He took a stand against the CACP�s position on the registry. It takes a lot of guts to face others of equal rank and say, �you are wrong.��
While Kuntz suspects the CACP isn�t deliberately trying to deceive the public, he hopes his survey results will send the chiefs and M.P.s an important message. M.P.s are voting on September 22 on an opposition-led motion that is poised to kill Bill C-391 even before it gets to the 3rd reading stage. Many pundits predict that the vote could be very close.
�I believe that the CACP believes they are looking out for us,� he explains �That�s the scary part. The registry was touted as a public safety program. The problem is, the registry does nothing to improve anyone�s safety and it has cost the Canadian public two billion dollars, plus millions per year to maintain. If such a wasteful program was proposed in the private sector, it would have never got off the ground in the first place.�
During debates on Bill C-391, some police services members told the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security that police were being warned by superiors against speaking publicly against the registry. Meanwhile, Kuntz�s fellow officers have cautioned him that his stance is likely to have a career-limiting effect. During his 22 years as a police officer, he has worked in the Intelligence Analysis Unit, Cold Case Homicide, Integrated Intelligence Unit with EPS and RCMP, Criminal Investigation Section, Driver Training, and he has been acting Detective/Sergeant.
�I have had an excellent career thus far in the rank of Constable,� he says. �I made it clear to our Human Resources recently that I would not be participating in any future promotion processes. Some things are more important than my personal ambitions. This is one of them. It is something that affects all Canadians as it is our money funding this wasteful program.�
He also provides some sage advice for new recruits: �If you rely on a computer database for your safety, you are an idiot. Learn to investigate using your observation and communication skills. We were pretty successful in doing that for 100 years prior to the registry.�
Kuntz can call it "kind of useless", but it proved very useful information when this happened....
Edmonton police Supt. Brad Doucette said the registry told them the likely type of weapon, and they cleared every street corner in range as a precaution.
Myself, when I hear of stories like this, it just makes sense to keep it. Granted that doesn't happen everyday (or even every month) in Edmonton, but I have no problem giving the police a tool like this to find out about what someone is potentially carrying in a dangerous situation. Honestly, I don't see the difference between this and registering my car.
My sister and her pot smoking low life husband dont have firearms licenses. If they get into a fight while I'm at Walmart, then the police officer is walking into a domestic dispute with false information regarding firearms on the premises.
Who is paying this guy off or is he just an idiot. Only stupid cops would check the registry before heading into a house and say, �Oh look partner, it says no guns, I guess we�re safe to go in with our hands in our pockets.� The safe cop, and the one who will be less likely to be shot on the job assumes every house he walks into has something in it that could kill him, because it does!
Ahh a nice big number but what I�m hearing from officers is their Cheifs are forgetting how this number is derived. Apparently each time an officer runs a name in CPIC (National Police Database) the system sends a query to cross reference the Gun registry. So Joe blow shop lifts and his name is run, the cop does not care if he owns a gun but the CPIC check will �access� the Gun Registry automatically. The number we need to know is how many times is it registered with the intention of seeing if the person owns a firearm. Also how many times is it accessed to see if a Hells Angels member owns an illegal firearm? Oh wait illegal firearms don�t get registered�.
Ok, I mean that is aweful, but how many of those were registered and of the ones that were would a registry check have saved their lives? �"It's not a matter of ideology� my ass!
Oh wait illegal firearms don�t get registered�.
Actually, thousands of Stolen rifles were allowed to be registered by incompetent gun registry staff. I'd google the exact number but I think I'll wait until someone calls BS.
Myself, when I hear of stories like this, it just makes sense to keep it. Granted that doesn't happen everyday (or even every month) in Edmonton, but I have no problem giving the police a tool like this to find out about what someone is potentially carrying in a dangerous situation.
The police already knew they were walking into a situation were the person was armed. The gun registry didn't help them with that, the reports of the persons actions told them all they needed to know.
What I object to is the registry was a colossal waste of tax payers money with almost no return on investment to John Q Canadian. Long guns have never been a problem as far as criminal activities go. The episode in Edmonton is a beyond rare occurrence. Long guns and their owners, who all had to have an FAC and the guns they purchased were all recorded (registered) by the gun shops when purchased for the last 30+ years, have been reduced to and treated like criminals ever since this and leading up to this gun registry coming into effect. The information was already in the hands of the government anyway, why did we need to spend all this money to do it all again? Granted it wouldn't take into account guns purchased before the FAC came in, but the vast majority of gun owners would have shown up. Not to mention hunting licences sold every year would give the government a pretty good idea who had guns, not too many hunters using home made slings shots to hunt Moose. My argument is that the billion+ dollar registry was redundant information and that long guns are not the problem when it comes to gun crime. The issue with gun crime is all about black market handguns and small automatic weapons, nothing with the gun registry helps with that. The registry is using a lot of resources to monitor law abiding Canadians that could be used to actually combat gun crime. Take those billions of dollars and put it to constructive use against the black market guns, you wouldn't hear a peep of objection out of me for that.
The registry is also the possible next step for the government to ultimately take all law abiding gun owners guns away in the future. That is ultimately the anti gun lobbyists goal. The shooting sports are a wonderful hobby and pastime. I've been involved in them in one fashion or another for almost 40 years and have never even considered the use of my firearms for any other purpose. The people targeted by gun control laws, like this registry, are your friends and neighbors who are just carrying on the great Canadian tradition of taking part in the shooting sports. Contrary to popular belief, it is a big part of our heritage here in Canada. All we are saying is quit targeting us with these feel good, useless and politically motivated laws and go after the real criminals for a change.
The registry is also the possible next step for the government to ultimately take all law abiding gun owners guns away in the future. That is ultimately the anti gun lobbyists goal. The shooting sports are a wonderful hobby and pastime. I've been involved in them in one fashion or another for almost 40 years and have never even considered the use of my firearms for any other purpose. The people targeted by gun control laws, like this registry, are your friends and neighbors who are just carrying on the great Canadian tradition of taking part in the shooting sports. Contrary to popular belief, it is a big part of our heritage here in Canada. All we are saying is quit targeting us with these feel good, useless and politically motivated laws and go after the real criminals for a change.
Oh wait illegal firearms don�t get registered�.
Actually, thousands of Stolen rifles were allowed to be registered by incompetent gun registry staff. I'd google the exact number but I think I'll wait until someone calls BS.
Not that I didn't believe you, I always believe government bureaucratic incompetence, but it sounded too funny not to check out so I did the Googling.
Here is the story of one reported stolen gun that was registered not once, not twice BUT THREE times!!!!
Reported lost firearms later registered 347, reported stolen ones registered 4,438, and this was just up to 2003. Numbers come right off of RCMP letter head from an ATIP request.
Honestly, I don't see the difference between this and registering my car.
Honestly? If you buy a car, park it on your driveway never register it and never use it, have you committed a crime?
That is the difference.
I don't see the difference between a car registry and a gun registry, except that the gun registry cost $2 Billion to perform the exact same function.
Myself, when I hear of stories like this, it just makes sense to keep it. Granted that doesn't happen everyday (or even every month) in Edmonton, but I have no problem giving the police a tool like this to find out about what someone is potentially carrying in a dangerous situation.
The police already knew they were walking into a situation were the person was armed. The gun registry didn't help them with that, the reports of the persons actions told them all they needed to know.
What I object to is the registry was a colossal waste of tax payers money with almost no return on investment to John Q Canadian. Long guns have never been a problem as far as criminal activities go. The episode in Edmonton is a beyond rare occurrence. Long guns and their owners, who all had to have an FAC and the guns they purchased were all recorded (registered) by the gun shops when purchased for the last 30+ years, have been reduced to and treated like criminals ever since this and leading up to this gun registry coming into effect. The information was already in the hands of the government anyway, why did we need to spend all this money to do it all again? Granted it wouldn't take into account guns purchased before the FAC came in, but the vast majority of gun owners would have shown up. Not to mention hunting licences sold every year would give the government a pretty good idea who had guns, not too many hunters using home made slings shots to hunt Moose. My argument is that the billion+ dollar registry was redundant information and that long guns are not the problem when it comes to gun crime. The issue with gun crime is all about black market handguns and small automatic weapons, nothing with the gun registry helps with that. The registry is using a lot of resources to monitor law abiding Canadians that could be used to actually combat gun crime. Take those billions of dollars and put it to constructive use against the black market guns, you wouldn't hear a peep of objection out of me for that.
The registry is also the possible next step for the government to ultimately take all law abiding gun owners guns away in the future. That is ultimately the anti gun lobbyists goal. The shooting sports are a wonderful hobby and pastime. I've been involved in them in one fashion or another for almost 40 years and have never even considered the use of my firearms for any other purpose. The people targeted by gun control laws, like this registry, are your friends and neighbors who are just carrying on the great Canadian tradition of taking part in the shooting sports. Contrary to popular belief, it is a big part of our heritage here in Canada. All we are saying is quit targeting us with these feel good, useless and politically motivated laws and go after the real criminals for a change.
Sure they knew he was armed, but the registry told them what he was likely armed with. It makes a big difference in what police need to do if he was armed with a rifle, a pistol, or a shotgun.
As for long guns not being a problem, I'll note this from the article I posted originally;
Sounds like long guns are a pretty serious issue to me...
I don't see gun owners "reduced to and treated like criminals" anymore than I feel like a criminal when I pay Alberta $70.45 to register my automobile every year. There are plenty of potentially dangerous items that must be registered with a government body to ensure it is used safely. Why should a firearm be any different than an automobile?
And the argument that the gun registry is expensive is totally outdated. It may have cost Canada up to $2 billion to set up, which I agree is a phenomenal (and ridiculous) cost, however the government does not spend billions of dollars to maintain it now. Eliminating the registry would only result in minor annual savings (an estimated $4 million annually). Ending the gun registry will not somehow magically return $2 billion to government coffers, but will ensure that an almost negligible expense is ended while a valuable law enforcement tool is scrapped.
Are you honestly telling me that to save a mere $4 million annually, we should scrap something that cost as much as $2 billion? If you are, that's just silly. It's almost like saying you're going to get rid of my car because it needs a new air filter every year.
I enjoy shooting too (my stag started at the shooting range actually) and I support people hunting and enjoying firearms in a responsible fashion. However, sometimes normal law-abiding gun owners lose grip on reality (or in the case of James Rosko, probably never had it), and coupled with instances where criminals steal guns from those same law-abiding owners, the registry is useful in helping identify who has what. Law abiding owners aren't "targeted" any more than drivers are. They are simply being asked to register their possession of a potentially harmful item.
I never figured you as one of the tin foil hat people who think that a registry is the first step in taking firearms away from law abiding owners. Yes, there are fringe elements that would like to see gun ownership end, but the reality is that they are a fringe, just like the fringe on the other side of the argument who somehow equate a gun registry with a total gun ban. While such things may have happened in dictatorships like Nazi Germany, last time I checked, Canada is not a dictatorship. People need to get over their irrational fear of the government having information on them.