06 April 2009

2 Billion dollars... and counting

Long live the Fiberals... "Farmer Bob Rifle Registry"...

Bill S-5, the Long-Gun Registry Repeal Act, introduced by the government in the Senate, would change nothing to the "laws" that now require the arrest of at least 185,925 peaceful Canadians.

Arrest 200,000 peaceful Canadians, then? Or selectively persecute some of them, as the police have (still timidly) started to do, in order to scare the others into submission?

The whole episode shows that it is impossible to enforce a liberticidal law with means that are consistent with a free society.

One has to yield: the liberticidal law — the whole liberticidal law — or the free society.

The jury is still out.
(via nicholls)

**********

RELATED: Do you have your ex-wife's permission?
19(f) During the past two years, have you experienced a divorce, a separation, a breakdown of a significant relationship, job loss or bankruptcy?"
Which is, of course, totally beside the point...
"This conclusion acknowledges that, in the absence of criminal records, substance abuse, and previous violence, domestic homicides rarely occur."
You wanna know... statistically... who kills their spouses in Canada? Here's a hint... it isn't skeet shooters, farmers or duck hunters.

It's one... previously convicted criminals, with two... substance abuse problems.

Who could have possibly figured that one out, huh?

*


38 comments:

Ted said...

Canadian Gun Nutz.

Join now!

robins111 said...

I'm in have been in for a while

ian said...

Given that a few years ago it was reported that the registry security was breached it seems a bit pointless.
How many registered weapons have been used in the commission of a crime?
Should there be an additional charge if a criminal uses an un-registered weapon in the commision of a crime?

Anonymous said...

LOL The cops can't even enforce law and order in Caledonia. How are they going to enforce THIS nonsense law?

Neo Conservative said...

*
"ian asks... How many registered weapons have been used in the commission of a crime?"

just ask bruce gold...

"Statistics Canada has reported that 2.27% of homicides in Canada were committed with a registered gun and only 1.21% were committed with a registered firearm that was owned by the accused."
SOURCE: (Statistics Canada study of 5,194 homicides between 1997 & 2005)


and that, my friends, is where your 2 billion dollars went.

*

Ted said...

Actually, this column explains better some of the very real and very many uses of the gun registry.

Two most important uses: (1) the more information the better, especially on domestic dispute calls; (2) the more information the better in investigations after the commission of a crime.

But what do the police know, eh? They are all just liberal fascists, right?

robins111 said...

Sorry Ted, but the article, leads you to believe that it is checked all the time,

Aint so, a traffic stop in Ontario will generate several hits.

Plus any owner of a restricted firearm is checked daily to make sure they didn't commit a crime in the last 24 hrs.

Front line Police think it's a waste of money which could be better spent on real efforts on the ground.

The dependance on the registry for information on a possible firearm in a domestic dispute call can and has killed police officers.

I would like the CAPC to give me one example where it has solved a crime, they were unable to provide that information to the Auditor General.

Additionaly, the picture which heads that article is misleading, nothing in the picture is a long gun, all are restricted or prohibited.

Lastly, the CAPC is a lobby group, plain and simple.

I have a question which you can ask the CAPC, how many of them get jobs at the firearms center after they retire?

Neo Conservative said...

*
"ted says... the more information the better"

ted... what part of "massive non-compliance" are you not getting here? read the auditor-general's reports on this monstrosity... the data is completely buggered

handguns... the weapon of choice for criminals... have required restricted registration since the 1930s. what's more relevant is that the guns the gangbangers use aren't even eligible for registration.

and, trust me... any cop who assumes, after checking this faulty database, that he can let down his guard... is naive beyond words.

so tell me, ted... going after farmer's varmint rifles and duck hunter's shotguns... does exactly what? did you even read the statistic above?

meanwhile... guess what 2 billion dollars directed against street crime would have accomplished?

good grief.

*

sor said...

Let's be clear here. When the police say they use the registry every day what they mean is that whenever they check a profile on their computer the information comes up.

They do not specifically look up the gun registry. That info is part of the profile package in their system.

It is therefore a little disingenuous to say that they use the gun registry every day.

Rather they use their computer every day, sometimes more than once.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"sor says... whenever they check a profile on their computer the information comes up."

exactly... you get pulled over for speeding, or blowing a stop sign... that counts as checking the registry.

it's just more politically correct "smoke and mirrors".

what i wanna know... when do we get our 2 billion dollars back?

*

Ted said...

Bullshit. You have to look up the registry to look up the registry. You check up someone's license plate, you don't pull up the registry. You look at someone's criminal record, you don't pull up the registry.

Of the many silly talking points from both sides of this issue, that one has always been one of the most ludicrously misinformed.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"ted says... Bullshit."

oh ted...

"Whenever police officers access the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) for any reason, such as for a simple address check, an automatic hit is generated with CFRO whether the information is desired or not."

"This is the case, for example, with the Toronto Police Service (5,000 officers), the Vancouver Police (1,400 officers), and the BC RCMP (5,000 officers)."
SOURCE: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada


*

sor said...

Sorry Ted you are dead wrong. All information is colated on every individual.

To believe that the police take the time to look up various sites to determine the parameters of each person is ridiculous.

The information on the gun registry is just one part of the profile similar to whether they have outstanding warrents, etc...

To say that the cops chose to look the gun registry every time they get a call says more about you than anything else.

Oh, and I have a bridge to sell you. Cheers.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"sor says... Oh, and I have a bridge to sell you."

well... if you look at ted's blogger profile, which curiously, isn't attached to a blog... you'll find that he is in the law industry.

perhaps he gets his info from his clients.

hmmm, tedley... a profile, but no blog. that makes you... as evidenced by your initial post... an unashamed troll... doesn't it?

i guess things were a little slow around the office today, huh?

*

Neo Conservative said...

*
p.s. tedley... i would have thought a real lawyer might be a little more concerned about the possible misuse of the complicated and often brain-dead databases involved here.

c'mon, buddy... you didn't imagine they blew 2 billion smackers on one machine for the whole ball of wax, did you?

this thing is a veritable house of cards...

"In order to meet the objective of section 5 of the Firearms Act, the FIP database was created in 1998 with five years of back data from police agencies for the purpose of flagging individuals who might not be eligible to hold a firearms licence."

"A FIP hit sometimes directs the FO to unsubstantiated and derogatory information, unproven charges or allegations, hearsay, records that are older than 5 years, incidents and charges that have been cleared or acquitted, duplicate entries as well as information about witnesses, victims of crime and various other associated subjects. People are unaware that they are being flagged in FIP as possible risks to public safety."
SOURCE: Review of the Personal Information Handling Practices of the Canadian Firearms Program - Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

but hey, no biggie, right?

*

Ted said...

You misread me, folks. I am fairly agnostic on the gun registry. I don't think its value is how much we've paid for it but we've paid for it and the cops keep saying it is useful.

I just find the talking points very amusing.

I don't for a second think you give a crap about whether it is useful or not. You think people should have a right to own a gun and the state has no business in the shooting ranges of the nation (so to speak). Everything else is a talking point.

Similar silliness on the other side. They don't think people should own guns so any law that makes it more difficult is good.

Cops - real cops as well as chiefs of police as well as the more political organizations that represent them - have consistently said it is useful. Big a strong supporter of our armed forces of all levels, I am going to put a lot more faith in them than a bunch of partisans and their talking points. I don't question a cop and his or her desire on the latest DNA technology or ask them how many crimes were prevented because of collecting DNA.

Not everything a cop asks for they should get, but you have to register your car, you have to register all sorts of goods and this is hardly any different and the demans - file a piece of paper and pay a minor fee - are not so onerous or privacy violation that, on balance, I will defer to the cops on this one.

(As for blogger profile, was once and you even had to apologize to me personally and to Kate for going a little hyper-partisan crazy nuts on me and my workplace Neo. Its people like you on the right and left that partly made me decide to give up blogging. Still it's fun to laugh sometimes at the silly talking points partisans regurgitate constantly in place of actual discussion.)

Luke said...

Canadian Firearms Registry On-line
Law enforcement officers have queried the Canadian Firearms Registry On-line over 8.4 million times since it was launched. The table below shows daily averages.
2008 figures
Individual name…………….6,304
Address………………………..2,518
Serial number………………..203
Licence number……………..133
Certificate number…………19
Telephone number…………16
Other…………………………….21
All queries………………………9213
• The Canadian Firearms Registry Online service provides police officers access to firearms licence and registration information in the Canadian Firearms Information System through the Canadian Police Information Centre computer network. This information helps the police to respond to calls more effectively in order to prevent injury and crime, assists in the investigation of firearm-related crimes and helps the police to identify and return stolen and lost firearms to their rightful owners.

Anonymous said...

Then there's the situation where a cop has queried the registry, no registered guns present, then responds to the domestic dispute and is shot with an illegal unregistered handgun fired by a chronic repeat offender drug addict.

This has happened more than once.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"ted says... you even had to apologize to me personally"

that's funny ted... how i remember it is, i mentioned your work place... where you apparently were blogging from, instead of working... thought it was over the line... and asked kate to pull the comment.

you wanna start obnoxiously trolling my blog and telling patent untruths... i'm guessing from your law office again... i've still got the email to kate... and we can revisit that issue. let me know buddy, okay?

i also think it's also pretty obvious from your initial troll... that you're not so 'agnostic' on the gun registry as you claim.

just the facts, ma'am.

*

Anonymous said...

Ted's your typical idiot Lieberal baffle gab artist.

What's for lunch Ted, brown bags passed under a restaurant table?

Bazoo said...

Ted I'm sure the Cops would love to be able to search your home any time without a warrent too. Anything that helps the police can't be a bad thing right?

Ted said...

Bazoo, I am honestly curious here. When you read "Not everything a cop asks for they should get" and "the demands - file a piece of paper and pay a minor fee - are not so onerous or privacy violation that, on balance, I will defer to the cops on this one", what happens inside your head.

Do you just ignore it altogether because it is someone trying to make you think? or does it actually go into your brain and get re-interpreted and reconfigured through some sort of broken conservative translator? Or am I giving you too much credit here: perhaps you have a serious reading problem? There is help. Unlike with brave anonymous just above your comment and our peaceful considerate and civil host, I sense there is some hope for you. Maybe I'm wrong. Let me know and I'll send you the helpline phone numbers.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"ted sneers... I'll send you the helpline phone numbers."

geez, ted... nice bedside manner. they teach you that at law school?

*

Ted said...

As it happens Neo, I am genuinely agnostic on this issue. If you were to tell me that the government was about to spend $2 billion to set up a gun registry, I would have said f*ck to that. That is irresponsible spending for pork and optics at an almost Harper-esque level.

But having spent the money, I turn to data. I`ve dug into this and there are some very strong and compelling conservative ARGUMENTS (as opposed to shallow talking points). But when it comes to police and crime, and unlike conservatives, I like to rely on data instead of emotion. And the data I have seen leads me, frankly slightly but it still leads me, to conclude that it is worth it. And other than hyper-partisan gun nuts, I don`t really see anyone opposing it.

Should we prevent the state from requiring us to register our cars? How many crimes have been prevented because of car registration?

Exactly.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"ted says... And the data I have seen leads me, frankly slightly but it still leads me, to conclude that it is worth it."

well, ted... you've haven't really said anything terribly compelling, or convincing to this point... witness ted@2:30 and ted@11:04.

how about, instead of trash-talkin' other commenters here... you share THAT data.

*

Bazoo said...

Well Ted, you don't get to Cherry Pick which powers you think the police should get or not get. I suppose it's not onerous if it does not apply to you. Under C-68 they can enter a gun owners home without any reason what ever and under this Law said owner must supply all information that they ask for. If I were selling drugs I'd have more protection under the law. As a Lawyer you should be appalled by this. Shame on you. I have no quarrel with the P.A.L. system but please explain in detail how attaching a slip of paper to a firearm makes it or the user any safer to the public. You certainly are ignorant of the provisions of our current set of Firearms Control Laws. Try educate yourself.

Ted said...

Now we are getting somewhere Bazoo.

Like I said, there are some compelling conservative arguments and we absolutely should not just simply do something because the police want it. And this is a good argument... for amending the legislation. Why have the Conservatives only tried to kill the gun registry instead of removing a provision like this?

Entry and search without a warrant should not be allowed except in extreme circumstances (ironically, I thought it was only the lefty moonbats and slimy defence attorneys who were letting criminals off the hook by enforcing Charter rights? Silly me looking for consistency on a conservative blog. Carry on.)

But I would not deny a cop from being able to do anything we would permit them to do with a motor vehicle: require license and registration and search the car if you have a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.

(And for the record - not that that seems to matter much around here - I think another good amendment that I'm surprised has not been introduced by the Conservatives in 3 years is to make the punishments similar to, again, registration of a car ownership. You can lose your license, get a fine and even your car, but not go to jail. That to me would be serving the purpose and be the right balance. Jail for non-registration seems to me a clear violation of the rule of the punishment fitting the crime.

I can think of lots of amendments that would make this law better and better balanced and fairer and still accomplish its real ends.

But because it is so politicized by hyper-partisans, it has become one of those litmus test issues for the hyperpartisans of each side. Any concession to reason is seen by the hyper-partisans is seen as stand-down and cannot be tolerated.

Bazoo said...

Ted you still have not addressed how registration makes the Firearm or user safer to the puplic. Automobile registration has not lessened Drunk Driving, Drive By Shootings, Fatal Collisions or any other Vehicular wrong doing. It's a tax grab. The Firearms Centre cannot or will not provide any information as to the crimes prevented or solved by the Long Gun Registry or Handgun Registry for that matter. License The Gun Owner. Period. No License, No Gun, No Ammo. You get caught with a Gun doing bad shit you are in serious trouble. It is enough that the Police know that I possess Firearms. They do not need to know what kind or how many. (And I'm not talking about machine guns or artillery either. So forget that arguement.) The Registry is a total waste because it it estimated that less then 1/3 of the guns in Canada are in the system. Before the current Law the R.C.M.P estimated that Canadians owned 30 million guns. To date we have 7 million registered. To make it look like the compliance rate was high the Liberals lowered these estimates. What good is a Registry with incomplete data. No careful Cop would rely on this data.

As to removing some of the more irritating measures in the current Legislation: The private members Bill C-301 would have done this but the Conservatives lost their Balls and introduced Bill S-5 which does nothing for anybody. What we will likely see in the not too distant future is a fracturing of Federal Firearms Law into more regional Laws. Each Provice will make their own legislation. Quebec is starting down that path.

Ted said...

Of course I haven't addressed those. Registration is not designed to solve all problems.

Car registration is not meant to do a thing about drunk driving. But neither is seat belt law or the law require specified tires. Not every law is meant to solve every problem.

But a car registration does show the cop that the vehicle is not stolen. It does allow a vehicle involved in a crime to be traced back to the owner or a stolen vehicle to be returned. And if a stolen vehicle was then used to in a drive-by shooting, it will help the cops a great deal to know that solving the stolen vehicle crime will help them in the murder investigation.

Indeed, if gun registration got as efficient as car registration, the benefits would be much more tangible and more street guns would be traceable (meaning more sources of street guns could more efficiently be cut off).

Are all of the many uses to which the gun registry information is put worth the set-up cost? As I said, I don't think so. Are they worth the ongoing cost? On balance, I think so but that is not the debate anyone really wants to have.

Bazoo said...

A Bill Of Sale also shows the Police that your Car/Gun is not stolen. You are making the assumption that "Street Guns" were Registered in the first place. Street Guns used by Street Thugs are not Registered by those Street Thugs. The only purpose of the Firearms Registry is to gradually remove Firearms from private individuals. (Sharon Carstairs had something to say about this as did Allan Rock.) It happened in Australia and England and can happen here. This is why The Long Gun Registry is so "Onerous" to Sport Shooters. We don't trust you lefties.

Rob Budde said...

I say take all the guns away from you nutz. Find something constructive to do.

mahmood said...

Rob drops a poeticism...

"I say take all the guns away from you nutz. Find something constructive to do."

Rob, your poetic license has been suspended, please report to poet court #101.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"rob "grey owl" budde lectures... take all the guns away from you nutz"

oh, rob... not again...

"Perhaps you could also take a moment Rob, to reflect upon the fact that... were it not for soldiers and horrible, evil guns... you might not be sitting around at your computer trolling Conservative websites."

"You might instead be chained to a workbench in a concentration camp making industrial products for the Greater German Reich."


*

Luke said...

According to the Cdn Firearm Program website, 15,045 people had their firearm licence revoked. These people now can’t own firearms. Whoever had firearms, must now legal transfer their firearms.
NOTE: Some reasons licences revoked include: a history of violence, mental illness, potential risk to himself/herself or others, unsafe firearm use and storage, drug offences, and providing false information.

With the gun registry a law officer can look at one of these 15,045 people who had lost their firearm licence and say, according to the gun registry you own a shotgun and a rifle, here are the serial numbers. Show me proof that you have legally transferred your firearm. The law officer can also search through the data base and verify that the firearms were transferred to a person who had a valid firearm licence.
If these people who lost their licences don’t have their firearms registered how would the authorities be able to know how many firearms must be legally transfer? Also if a person sold his unregistered firearms to a person who doesn’t have a valid firearm licence how would the seller be caught?

“Increasing owner accountability
The Firearms Act prohibits individuals from selling firearms to those who are not eligible. Under the CFP’s management, registration must be transferred to the new owner and during the transfer process a computerized public safety check on the new owner makes sure that there are no reasons why they should not have firearms. Without this process, people could buy firearms legally, and then sell them on the criminal black market without fear of being held accountable.”

With the gun lobbyist propaganda (lie) of the $2 billion waste on the gun registry they want people to believe registering long guns will save billions of dollars.
They fail to mention the $1 billion price tag of the CFP includes the establishment of the CFP from scratch, computer systems, background checks of people who apply for a firearm licence, registering restricted firearms, salaries for people to maintain the data base, building costs etc.

The gun lobbyist won’t stipulate the cost savings of registering unrestricted firearms. Because it’s very little. They lump all the costs together and come up with an overblown figure of $2 billion. They claim the money was wasted. Therefore I conclude they want the CFP scrapped. No background checks, no requirement for safety courses, no registering of restricted firearms, no data base for licensed firearm owners.

The gun lobbyist want purchasing a firearm similar to purchasing lets say a computer. The only cost is the purchase price of the firearm. Eliminate the purchaser’s requirement to have a Firearm licence and a background check and just have the sales receipt stored at the dealers place.

Does posted speed limits on the road stop all acidents caused by speeding?

Neo Conservative said...

*
luke... you forgot to include the link to your source here... i'd be interested in looking at that.

so... where to start? how about firearms and crime?

first off... let's remember that handguns, the weapon of choice for both sociopaths and criminals... have required registration as "restricted firearms" since the 1930s. the guns used by gangs, just like bombs, or machine guns aren't eligible for registration.

the "farmer bob rifle registry" is a 2 billion dollar p.r. stunt enacted by the liberals after gamil gharbi killed 14 women in montreal... which targets... not criminals... but skeet shooters, farmers and duck hunters.

it wasn't about fighting crime... it was about getting votes. and we all paid for it.

and luke, say you wanted to shoot clay pigeons at a local gun club. did you know you now need permission from your ex-wife, or even ex-girlfriend to purchase a firearm? and if your neighbour decides to call the cops after an argument over the fence... your name can be entered in the fip database... which triggers an investigation of your sanity. how many revocations does that sort of thing account for? that's the type of country you wanna live in?

note also that that money for all this went straight into the pockets of liberal friendly corporations... who still don't have a proper database.

that 2 billion dollars could have bought a lot of law enforcement, or health care or even social services.

we got taken, my friend... all of us.

*

Bazoo said...

Luke you are making the false assumption that all of his guns were registered to begin with. If he had his PAL revoked he is most likely a person that would not register his guns. You are also assuming that a person could not access Black Market weapons that are smuggled into the country or made at home. Yes a functioning firearm is quite easy to make from hardware store parts. You cannot control millions of small objects. You may as well try to register paper clips. If the police are satisfied that your hypothetical gun owner is capable of doing harm why not simply detain him until he is not a threat. Just because he can't access weapons legally does not mean he can't kill or maim in another way.

Bob you have made my point about not trusting Lefties very nicely. Thank you for you input.

rbudde said...

Erm, I think the Greater German Reich had guns too. Maybe if no one had them, we would just slap each other silly and get on with living. No, seriously, there are TOO MANY GUNS. You cannot argue against that. Way too many. Restrict them to a few responsible users (like all of Neo's gang) and melt down the rest to make toasters.

Neo Conservative said...

*
"rob 'grey owl' budde says... You cannot argue against that."

sure, rob... because you and the crew of the good ship lollipop say so.

i'm off to melt down all my guns as soon as i finish typing. thx for helping me to see the light.

*