Monday, September 20, 2010

Gruending On The Gun Registry

Dennis Gruending pens a nice defense. Here's just a few bits re the claims made against the LGR:

It costs people too much to register rifles and shotguns and the process is swathed in red tape. In fact, it’s free to register or transfer the registration of rifles and shotguns and gun owners can register their guns online or over the phone in minutes.


Gun violence is a big city problem but long gun registry targets people in rural areas. In fact, gun deaths are higher in rural areas and Western provinces. In Yukon, for example, gun deaths run at about three times the national average.


The firearms registry does nothing to prevent violence against women. Safety experts and frontline workers women’s shelters across the country beg to differ. They say that the registry helps reduce violence against women. Do you prefer to believe them or to believe a gun shop owner on this one?

Go get 'em, Dennis.


R. G. Harvie said...

Yes.. and last week we saw the sad use of the victims of shootings at Dawson College also talking about how the registry saves lives.

Except that Kimveer Gill's weapon WAS registered.

And, looking back a litte farther, Marc L├ępine also complied with every legal requirement to obtain his weapon as well.. applying for his FAC, waiting the prescribed period before it was obtained and then buying his Ruger Mini 14 legally, and presumeably would have also registered his weapon.

But even if he didn't - is there any doubt, seriously, that things would have been different if he HAD registered his weapon?

MLM said...

Hey R.G.,

Since you are using a single story to prove a point beyond proving, let's look at another.

It was a registry search that led to the arrest of Robert Pickton, who without any doubt would have killed more. Hence, the registry saved lives.

It was a registry search that led the police to the two responsible for providing the weapons that, in the hands of a madman, killed four mounties at Mayerthorpe. Anyone so vile as they would surely have done more harm to society.

A routine police stop landed 4 stolen registered guns, with further checks finding 8 more. The owner was in Florida, and had no idea they were missing. The guns were returned, the crime clues were put together, and the thief was prosecuted. Why did he have stolen guns, and what was he going to do with them? We can speculate the worst, but thanks to the registry we don't have to.

The registry does save lives. It saves them in ways we cannot begin to imagine, by providing the hard evidence for arrests and convictions that remove criminals from our streets.

Socially Active said...

The long gun register should be fixed.

- Penalties for non-registration should start as non-criminal fines

- Aboriginal treaty rights must be protected

- Gun-owners' privacy needs protection

- There should never be a charge for long-gun registration

- Municipalities should be empowered to, if they choose to do so, ban handguns from their cities.

R. G. Harvie said...

BCL: “It was a registry search that led to the arrest of Robert Pickton, who without any doubt would have killed more. Hence, the registry saved lives.”

You are better than this. And you are, I fear, getting caught up in the same sort of misleading emotional rhetoric I mentioned regarding the school shootings.

Obviously, the registry didn’t prevent the Dawson College shooting – as the gun was registered.

As for Pickton, he was charged with storing a firearm contrary to regulations, possession of a firearm while not being holder of a license and possession of a loaded restricted firearm without a license. In other words, everything he was charged with had nothing to do with the gun registry - and the warrant used to search his premises would have been obtained regardless of the registry.

As for the Mayerthorpe killings.. as you are aware the gun registry was also in force, obviously, and yet somehow, tragically, it did nothing to protect those RCMP officers killed.

Now to be fair – the registry may help investigate crimes AFTER THE FACT – which is what happened in the Mayerthorpe case, and certainly, there is nothing wrong with assisting in the ability to investigate crimes.. but the notion that this registry somehow makes us safer is pretty weak.

Certainly too weak to spend the money we’re spending – which could be better used for more well-thought out efforts to reduce crime.

Which, in case you are going to ask – DOES NOT INCLUDE building more jails and increasing mandatory sentencing. I’m against costly stupid Conservative efforts just as much as costly stupid Liberal efforts.

Gayle said...

So then you support the registry as a crime solving tool? Good to know.

rockfish said...

RG also fails to point out that for a majority of long gun homicides, the killer did so without a criminal record. So the spew that is "stop punishing honest gun owners, target the guilty" would throw in the face of his argument that the registry wouldn't prevent so many crimes.
In a way, I suppose, he's helping create an argument for the ban of all firearms; however that will fuel his secret meme of "they're out to steal our guns and kiss our womin!"
I love Harper's new slogan, too - that no matter what, we gun owners are going to get our way. That's a nice threat to be throwing out to a population that by and large has no interest in turning into Texas.