Friday, November 20, 2009

Conservatives enabling Criminals to Keep their Guns

Gun nuts love to drone on about how law abiding gun owners are being targeted by registry. Leaving aside the fact that given that it is a crime not to register a gun, only gun owners that register their guns are law abiding. Of course the registry targets --- a odd choice of words given the subject matter really--- , law abiding gun owners. If you take any large group of people, and the number of law abiding gun owners is large, you can predict with fairly good accuracy that a certain number will develop heart disease, a certain number will get cancer, and certain numbers will be convicted of a crime. By not having Canadians register long guns, the Conservatives are enabling criminals to have guns. After all, the registry, and remember we are talking about former law abiding gun owners who dutifully registered all their guns, gives the authorities enough ammunition to ensure these criminals surrender their registered guns.

6 comments:

Luke said...

Continuous-Eligibility Screening
All current POL or PAL firearms licensees are recorded in the Canadian Firearms Information System (CFIS), which automatically checks with the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) every day to determine whether a licence holder has been the subject of an incident report in CPIC. All matches generate a report entitled Firearms Interest Police (FIP) that is automatically forwarded to the relevant CFO for follow-up. Some of these reports require no further action, but some prompt a review of the individual’s firearms licence and may result in its revocation, allowing police to seize the firearms. This continuous-eligibility screening reduces the likelihood that an individual who has been identified as a potential risk to public safety will be permitted to retain possession of firearms.

From 1999 to 2008 -16,012 people had their firearm licences revoked. Reasons for firearm revocations: Potential risk to self, mental health, violent, Drug offences, Domestic violence, Provided false information, Court-ordered prohibition or probation, Potential risk to others, Unsafe firearms use and storage.

“The Registrar of Firearms is notified of all licence revocations, is responsible for revoking all associated registration certificates, and works to ensure proper disposal of the firearms.”

If person had their firearm licence revoked and their firearms aren’t registered how would the authorites ensure proper disposal of the firearms?

The Rat said...

Luke, how would they know if he had borrowed a gun from a friend? How would they know if he had acquired an illegal firearm? The answer is the same to both questions, and to yours: Through actual police work.

You know as well as I that the registry is incapable of telling the police what guns ARE there, just which MIGHT be there. If the person is considered a risk and has a gun licence then the answer is a search warrant, not a registry check.

Jim said...

After reading your incomprehensible run on paragraph I gotta ask...Are you drunk?

Or have you been hitting the pipe again?

Koby said...

I will slow it down for you Jim Bob. Let us start with a non-firm related example.

Take a million cancer free Canadians at random. Given current cancer rates, in 5 years time thousands of them will have cancer. Got it. This is not difficult stuff.

As it is a crime not to register a gun, it follows that only gun owners who registered their guns are law abiding in the strict legal sense. This is basic first year logic. Are you with me still?

The number of "law abiding" gun owners in Canada is huge and as with any large population of people you can make various predictions about what will happen to them over time. One such prediction relates to criminality. Just by playing the percentages related to sex and age etc, in 5 years you can bet money that thousands will have committed crime. Are you with me? Again this is not difficult stuff.

The registry allows authorities to make sure these "law abiding" gun owners who are no longer law abiding to surrender their registered weapons.

If, however, they did not have to register their weapons in the first place the police would be robbed of something they have now. Namely, the police will be robbed of the ability to compel these criminals to turn over their weapons. Without a registry, the police would have no proof that they ever owned a long gun in the first place. Now that was not so hard.

Koby said...

"Luke, how would they know if he had borrowed a gun from a friend? How would they know if he had acquired an illegal firearm?"
You would not know, but that is hardly the point. The notion that everyone who has their gun licensed revoked is going to buy an illegal fire or borrow a buddy's gun beggars belief.

Let me go at it in different way.

I assume you have heard of negative billing. One of the guiding assumptions behind it is this; It is far more likely that someone is not going to do something then it is that they will go out to do something. Passively accepting the extra TV channels or failing to turn in a gun that the authorities do not know about does not require any energy or effort. Canceling those extra channels and buying an illegal fire arm, on the other hand, does.

janay said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.