Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Gun Problems In Milton (And Other Rural Areas)

Still a bit sick and too low on energy to write much myself, so here's a nice bit from Jennifer Smith's post on the long-gun registry:

...here in Milton, we just don't have a lot of gang-bangers or drug dealers or bikers or Mafia-types, or any of the sorts of scary career criminals you see on American TV (well, we do, but most of them are locked up in Maplehurst up the road).

What we do have in this quiet little town are drunks, abusive spouses and bored teenagers. Some of them have access to firearms. Most of them are upright, law-abiding citizens - right up until they're not. So for me as well as for all those other people trying to defend their 'rural lifestyle', the odds of getting shot by a previously law-abiding spouse, or a drunken neighbour, or some kid showing off his dad's .22 to his friends are much, much higher than the chances of getting shot by a gang member with an illegal handgun.

In other words, the people who tend to be the most vocal against the long gun registry are also the ones who potentially benefit the most from it.

Jen's post also takes aim at a number of gun-registry myths. All good ammo (as it were) in the on-going debate.


Robert G. Harvie, Q.C. said...

And the question remains unanswered.

Is there anything to suggest that registering a weapon makes it LESS likely to be used in a crime?

There is absolutely NO study to support that proposition. The money could be much better used to reduce domestic violence, which is a prime contributor to the tendancy of youth to see violence as a reasonable tool to resolve problems.

Frank said...

Sorry to hear you're under the weather, or is it just that Liberals can't hold their liquor.

Anyway, speaking of weather, this might warm you up. NOAA has reported the third coolest October on record:
"The average October temperature of 50.8°F was 4.0°F below the 20th Century average and ranked as the 3rd coolest based on preliminary data."

Get well.

CanadianSense said...

Unintended Consequences for Bad Policy

How many front line police officers could have been hired, youth programs in problem areas, domestic abuse counselling programs could have been funded with the $ 2 Billion instead in those high risk areas?

Are you against preventative measures or a more effective use of taxpayers dollars?

An annual form with a fee can't stop 'Old Macdonald' from going postal.

Did the AG in her Report note how many errors are contained in the Report? How safe is it to rely on a database that is 40% accurate?

What is the compliance of our aboriginal population regarding registration of their weapons?

Are you suggesting we raid the reservations to have a larger compliance on registration?

The one size fits all policy did not work.

JimBobby said...

When we register our vehicles, does that make it less likely that the car will be used in a crime?

When we talk about "the money" we need to remember that the big cost of setting up the registry is water under the bridge. We can't use that undeniably too-high cost as a reason to scrap the registry. The ongoing costs are relatively low at $3 million per year.

Suppose I build myself a super-duper energy efficient house but I spend 10x as much building it as I estimated. Do I move in and maintain the over-priced home? Or, do I tear it down?

Working with what one has and refraining from wasteful, unnecessary rebuilding is a conservative virtue.

When I register my dog, boat, car and business, I take responsibility for my ownership and liabilities. The biggest reason gun owners are mobilized against the registry is due to the influence or "right to bear arms" NRA US outside agitators.

Robert G. Harvie, Q.C. said...

Good post CC.. and JimBobby.. get back to the point. Is there anything to suggest that registering a firearm reduces the odds it will be misused?

And even if the initial start-up costs have leveled off, it still costs a lot of money that could be used elsewhere to better effect.

That's the point, and that's he point that opponents don't want to discuss (which is happening here).

No one says it does absolutely NOTHING - if that were the case, I would seriously have to consider a broad dependant adult declaration for the GTA.. the point is it doesn't do MUCH.

And the auto registration argument is so lame. Yes.. and we also register births of children and marriages - does that make spouses safer because their marriage is registered? Are children safer from abuse because their birth was registered?

Fewer ideologues, more dialogs.

Frank said...

Jimmy me boy. The voters spoke loudly yesterday in two rural ridings in QC and NS. The Libs turned in a dismal third. The Libs are dead meat now outside of the downtown welfare state city cores. A nice way to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the fall of communism.

Jay said...

Rob is it necessary to get tough on drugs when no matter how hard you try people can still get them? What's wrong with buying drugs if you don't ingest them? Some are very beautiful plants to look at. It's not the plant, it's what irresponsible people and criminals do with them.

Isn't it a bit of a nanny state when the government dictates what foliage you can have?


Ti-Guy said...

These posts are wingnut magnets.

Like I've always, said, it doesn't bode well that raging wingnuts with poor impulse control are also such avid gun enthusiasts.

Frankly, these people should have to register the air they breathe.

JimBobby said...

FrankD, I ain't a Liberal. City cores ain't welfare states. Liberals ain't communists.

BTW, my (licensed) dog is also named FrankD. FranklinD, actually.

Rob, is there some reason why the registry MUST reduce the odds that a gun will be misused? You seem to be saying that unless it does that one thing, it is not worthwhile.

The car argument is used because many people own cars and understand that they operate a potentially deadly piece of machinery. Even though we still license drivers, we insist upon registering the vehicles they operate. The vast majority of car owners willingly accept the nuisance, fees, and social responsibility of registering their vehicles. (Some) gun owners balk. Why? NRA.

CanadianSense said...


great story. Let's pretend the GR did not cost $ 2 Billion.

We have this wonderful "Green Home", it only cost a few million right to keep?

1) The house did not include any windows.
2) The house was built over a swamp and the ground is shifting resulting in serious cracks and repairs to fix the problems.

So JB,

What is the compliance rate in our Aboriginal Population? How much will it cost to get the errors and audit the Registry is a reliable tool?

How will you enfore the Gun Registry if a few thousand "duck hunting-rednecks, constitutionally challenged aboriginals" refuse to cooperate by filling in those forms?

Since the Registry has been in place has Gun Violence in the Urban Centres gone up or down? Rural? Where are the stats to connect a Registry is a public safety tool?
Jail them, confiscate their guns?

How much will it cost to enforce the Registry?

CanadianSense said...


I agree we should not chase a phoney drug war.

If you are impaired in public, behind the wheel the laws already exist.

The manufacturing and production should be illegal. The Provinces should regulate it and allow farmers to grow it as a cash crop.

A regulated and safe production facility like Maple Leaf Foods could also be contracted to help in the packaging.

Ti-Guy said...

Rob, you're such a treat.

Is there anything to suggest that registering a weapon makes it LESS likely to be used in a crime?

JB responds:

When we register our vehicles, does that make it less likely that the car will be used in a crime?

Rob rejoins:

JimBobby.. get back to the point. Is there anything to suggest that registering a firearm reduces the odds it will be misused?

...and the finishes with:

Fewer ideologues, more dialogs (sic).

In Rob's world, "dialogue" means "I will ask the questions and you will answer them!"

Gene Rayburn said...

"The manufacturing and production should be illegal."

And how pray tell, are you going to prohibit the growth of a plant that will grow all the way to the Yukon territory. Cannabis already has a healthy wild population across Canada so it's a bit too late. I think allowing private growers and public individuals to get growing permits is a better idea than letting some McFarm create Monsanto Weed.

But then again I dont eat mutant food either.

Gene Rayburn said...

"just that Liberals can't hold their liquor."

Ho ho, so funny! Conservatives and comedy, like oil and water.

CanadianSense said...


I am not talking about personal consumption farming.

It is illegal to set up a commercial enterprise in your home. Safety and health regulation, zoning etc.

The Province and Cities are allowed to regulate "commercial" activity including if you are allowed to have a chicken in your backyard.

The Federal Government should respect the jurisdiction of the city and provinces.

Ti-Guy said...

How many comments is that for NonCanadianNonsense so far today? Any guesses?

I'm pretty sure it's a group effort.

Robert G. Harvie, Q.C. said...

No TG.. as usual, full of criticism, but nothing of substance to add.

I don't care if there are those that disagree with me.. but tell me why.

I get that registering a firearm may assist, after the fact, with prosecuting the offender. I understand that. I also understand, in a perfect world, where all firearms are registered, it would improve police response to domestic disputes.

But. All firearms aren't registered and never will be registered.. so, at best, you have an inherently inaccurate search tool.

The bigger question, clearly, is for marginal effect on gun crime, could those dollars be better spent.

Criminology professors from Univeristy of Ottawa say it could.

I'm waiting for someone on the pro-registry side to explain why the money is BEST spent on a flawed registry system.

This, TG.. is called "rational discussion". I'm not jumping up and down about the fascist liberals trying to take away my weapons, I don't even have a gun. I don't hunt. I never have. I just don't see the point.

WesternGrit said...

This is an idiotic statement:

"And the question remains unanswered.

Is there anything to suggest that registering a weapon makes it LESS likely to be used in a crime?"

How on earth do you propose to track what DIDN'T happen. Only statistics on lower levels of gun crime can prove this. Take this from someone who has studied scientific method, and studied science to the post-grad level (including Statistics).

The evidence is in the "proof" of lower gun crime levels.

Oh. One other thing. Most "criminals" are good law-abiding citizens at some point. If the wife-beater husband has a long gun, and has to think twice about murdering his spouse or neighbor because his gun is traceable, then we have already begun to win our battle.

I guess common sense can't appease a crowd who have elevated this argument to a misplaced "holy cow".

This is not the USA, and you DON'T have a "right" to bear arms here.

CanadianSense said...


Where is the study that showed the LG Registry would make it safer?


Now where is your evidence prior to the policy implementation?

Where is the evidence after the fact?

Are you suggesting a form and fee will make someone think twice before becoming suicidal, homicidal? Please link that study.

Ti-Guy said...

Does registering a car make it less likely to be used in a crime?

Gene Rayburn said...

No Ti-Guy, but I wouldnt be surprised if folks like the Ex Mrs Ignatieff would support a pre-emptive lockup of all those that look strange. It seems to be their schtick. Well that and being full of outrage and bluster all the time. Sigh it must suck to be around them...

Gayle said...

"Is there anything to suggest that registering a weapon makes it LESS likely to be used in a crime?"


I noticed you ignored my response last time you asked this question.

The issue is not crime prevention - it is crime investigation.

While I feel prevention is more important than detection, I also feel bringing criminals to justice is a worthy aim of any legislation.

And if you are going to ask where our money is best spent, you need to look at minimum sentences, which do not deter crimes and which will cost us billions of dollars.

Really - if that is your issue then be consistent.

CanadianSense said...

Gayle you are trying to move the goalposts.

Why was the Long Gun Registry started?

1) A tragic event in QC.

There was NO study or Valid reason to ask thousands of law abiding citizen to register their property as a result of that tragedy.

The Government at the TIME (Liberals) promised the Bad Policy would make it safer and reduce crime.

Again Gayle NO study or Valid reason can be drawn to connnect how requiring thousands of law abiding citizens to fill out a form and submitting a fee changes ANYTHING.

A car is a perfect example.

The problem is a small number of criminals who have lost their right to drive but continue to drive. Drunk Drivers make up a very small percentage of the population but they still drive without a licence or insurance.

The Auditor General found the database to have significant errors making the database in need of an audit.

Compliance is 50%? How do you get those in non compliance arrest them? If the Aboriginals don't recognize the LG Registry how do you resolve it?

We don't have the WILL to stop the illegal smokes on Reserves, you want to try the guns?


Another distraction about longer sentences. You risk/will crimininalize thousands of people who have refuse to cooperate.

You can't have it both ways and pretend 100% will happen.

The CASE for the LG is not valid because Police Chief think it is a valid tool.

The Fraser study was linked.


Your talking points are handled inside.

Gayle said...

CS - the Fraser study? This is the one where the author starts on the premise that there is no need to assess rates of gun crime after the registry? That does not raise red flags for you?

Of course not.

In any event, I see you have totally ignored my point. I can only assume that is because you know you are unable to counter it. Who cares IF the registry was enacted with the purpose of reducing crime, the point is the registry has been used, and should be used, to bring criminals to justice.

But then I can see that you think it is way more important that farmers not be put to the dreadful inconvenience of having to fill out forms in order to assist the police in doing their jobs.

Car registration is used for the same thing, by the way.

Nice try on the diversion though.

PS - the much greater amount of money we spend on keeping people in prison could also be better used for diversionary measures. You cannot have it both ways (though taking completely contradictory and hypocritical posisions seems to come natural to you).

Gayle said...

"You risk/will crimininalize thousands of people who have refuse to cooperate."

Actually, that's their risk.

We also criminalize people who do not pay their taxes, or declare all their income. Are you standing up for them too?

CanadianSense said...

Gayle you can't have it both ways.

The LG Registry is NOT working and was NOT implemented to improve Public Safety.

In one post you want to keep it to help investigate and bring criminals to justice. (It's a tool)

You ignore and pretend the substantials ERRORS in the database.

Simple Math.

It will cost millions to fix the database to make it better, money well spent in prevention.

Some of us call them priorities. A serious problem for the Liberals atm.

Now on doublespeak. Gayle you are advocating we lay charges invest time and energy from our Police and Justice system to get those thousands of Canadians (Duck hunters. Aboriginals) who are not interested in compliance.

We can't be bothered to stop taxpayers from going weekly to buy their tax free smokes on reserves.

The estimates of losses in taxes is "Billions."

I accept neither the Provincial or Federal Government in interested in chasing this issue regarding a long gun registry.

Gayle keep chasing this issue it will do wonders for the NDP and Liberals who broke ranks.

Their leaders will not whip them. Best of luck without being able to prove your case with those NDP and Liberals MP's.
Threaten to withold your donation, that should really scare them!

Gayle said...

"Gayle you are advocating we lay charges invest time and energy from our Police and Justice system to get those thousands of Canadians (Duck hunters. Aboriginals) who are not interested in compliance."

Where did I say that?

Why don't you care about solving crime? Why is it more important that we not inconvenience farmers than it is that we have effective crime solving tools?

Do you think the police are lying about the effectiveness of the gun registry? Why don't you trust the police?

Why aren't you out there protesting the fact that the new sentencing provisions requires billions of dollars of infrastructure costs?

Do try to be consistent. I know it's hard for you, but try anyway.

CanadianSense said...

Moving Goalposts and introducing circular logic. Instead of sticking to introducing points or facts regarding the Long Gun Registry you continue to play games.

Gayle you are demanding the Liberals and NDP whip their MP's without proof it will do anything worthwhile.

You failed to make any a case or why it was introduced and told others to NOT produce "evidence" to justify why it was introduced.

(Denial of Historical Relevance)

The statistics don't support the $ 2 Billion investment as a good policy. (Factual AG Sheila Fraser)

Now the defenders argue "sunk costs" and it is a useful tool because the Police Chiefs endorse the use. It only costs a $ 3 million per year.

You have lost the "Public Safety" or "Crime Prevention" Point.

Scrambling for more silly talking points?

Accusing people as paranoid and distrusting the "Police" because a Bad Policy without evidence is not supported by a majority of MP's.

Gayle you don't trust the majority of MP's who voted to scrap the Long Gun Registry? You must support the Bloc on everything than? (That is your twisted logic)

1) Ignore the Politics why, when it was introduced.
2) Ignore the substantial errors in the database.
3) The Amensty has killed the database and the costs would skyrocket to make the data base accurate or reliable.
4) The Political"Will" does not exist.
5) The Bloc lost their "rural" riding.

Distraction by Gayle because she failed to address basic truths about a BAD Policy introduced regarding a tragedy.

Why aren't you out there protesting the fact that the new sentencing provisions requires billions of dollars of infrastructure costs?

You are a fan of Big Government Period, more STATE control. You want to restrict freedom and rights of individuals on behalf of the state. Perhaps the Communist Party is closer to your idealogy.

Grab some cement and start building a new WALL. Best of luck.

Gayle said...

You know, constantly changing your line of attack in a weak and transparent attempt to hide the fact you cannot respond to my points does not make you look intelligent.

I have explained why the registry is relevant and should be maintained. You are clearly more interested in placating farmers than you are in solving crimes.

You are talking political perception while I am discussing facts.

Sad little you does not know they are not the same thing.

CanadianSense said...

I have explained why the registry is relevant and should be maintained.-Gayle

No you have failed miserably.

You have linked ZERO studies as proof.

You cite Police Chief as "Proof".

You run to useful "tool" for investigations to help AFTER a crime has been committed.

Like more socialists who want simply want to trample right and freedoms for more state control.

It just makes you "feel" good. Facts don't matter.

Gayle said...


You are funny.

You don't believe the police when they tell you they use it to solve crime? Is that how you determine "proof" - what you want to believe or not?

I am done with this now. Let me know when you want an adult discussion.


CanadianSense said...

See Spot Run

Gayle state Police Chiefs support is now Proof the LGR makes sense.

Where is the Proof from the Police Cheifs?

See Spot Run.

Where are the studies and articles showing how LGR stopped a crime or prevented a CRIME?

See Spot Run.

Let's the duck hunters and Aboriginals face the penalty!

See Spot Run.

Gayle the latest fan of a Police State and supporter of Big Government.

Facts and truths don't matter.

Police Chiefs like it!

See Spot Run.

Gayle said...

I am really sorry. When I said I wanted an adult discussion, I should have remembered who I am dealing with. I should not ask you to do the impossible.

Now, go back and read my posts again and see if you can "spot" where you went wrong.

Ask your mommy for help if you are still confused.

Better yet, ask her to respond for you. It will probably help.

CanadianSense said...

Gayle most Canadians don't accept the Jean Chretien A proof is a good proof as a FACT.

Try again with you have actual FACTS or science to back up your Police State hopes.

Gayle said...

Again, what is it about what the police are saying that you have so much trouble believing? They say they use it for criminal investigation, they say they are using it more and more.

On what to you base your contention they are lying about that?

And just so you know, responding with yet another rambling incoherent post where you accuse me of imaginary statements and misdeeds is not going to cut it. Address the issue - give me a credible reason why I should think the police are making it all up.

CanadianSense said...

Gayle your inability to be FACTUAL when and how the Long Gun Registry was created eliminates any credibility on this subject matter.

Hide behind the Police Chiefs like and now have mandated they use it.

The majority of MP is the HOC have reviewed ALL the facts and agree it was a Bad Policy.

Goodluck with bringing it back.

Gayle said...

So you have no reason to doubt the authenticity of the claims by the police then?

As expected, you ignored the issue, tried to shift the argument and went back to your "political perception" argument.

Let me know when you want a serious discussion on the facts. Your habit of hiding your head in the sand when confronted with an argument you cannot answer is becoming tiresome.

PS - the majority in the House did what was politically expedient. VanLoan was hiding the facts so how could the MP's have them?

Not to mention that I was unaware MP's were the sole determiners of what is factual and what is not. This country is in worse shape than I thought!

CanadianSense said...

Gayle the only people who are in trouble is those who refuse to accept FACTS and want STATE control.

AGW is not settled science and will not move forward at the Conference. Thanks to the countries not willing to set up another ponzi scheme.

The Registry was a $ 2 Billion dollar boondoggle compliments of the Liberal Party.

The LG Registry will be used to give the current gov't a majority and the rural MP's will not allow their URBAN leaders to pander to left wing fringe groups that you belong too.

Goodluck finding a political party campaigning on bringing it back.

Goodluck in also having the AGW be campaigned on in 2010.

Gayle said...

Ha Ha Ha.

Thanks for proving my point.