Thursday, January 13, 2011

Ignore the Illegal Guns

That is what the Conservative member  for Bruce-Grey-Owen-Sound wants the government to do. He says that we should turn a blind eye to farmers who use their unregistered guns to protect their livestock. This is a bad statement to make. He is saying that it is okay to break the law if it is done to make money. What should be done is sending a Firearms Centre representative from door to door once a year to see if there are any guns that farmers want to register. Hence, it wouldn't be such a hassle for farmers to register their guns. The gun registry helps save lives and should be maintained. And even though the Tories allege it costs billions of dollars, it costs but a fraction of that.
OTTAWA—Conservative MP Larry Miller has suggested government officials should turn a blind eye to unregistered firearms if farmers are just using them to protect their livestock from coyotes.
The beef farmer-turned-federal politician made the remarks at a Saturday meeting in Elmwood, Ont., to discuss how to deal with the growing problem of coyotes preying on sheep and other farm animals in the area.
 Read more at the Toronto Star.


  1. The law has been ignored for years; Even during the Liberal years. It was run so poorly that there are citizens who think they have registered them but no record exists. They wouldn't know until they were fined or jailed. Even Ignatieff suggested decriminalizing non compliance to the registry.

    The long guns are not illegal, just not registered. YOU CANNOT REGISTER AN ILLEGAL GUN.

    The bigger problem is illegal guns that are smuggled into Canada. This requires in part I suspect, a crackdown on the reserves that border the US. That didn't happen with a Liberal govt' nor will it (I doubt it will under a Conservative gov't either).

  2. "The gun registry helps save lives and should be maintained."

    You have no evidence of that.

    plus, there is a world of evidence supporting the fact that more guns means less crime.

    Chicago and Washington DC are just two examples.

    When both instituted a ban, violent crime went up as noted by the Supreme Court.

    Vermont has less crime than Toronto and has lax guns laws and very liberal inhabitants.

    You've been brainwashed to believe that controlling law abiding citizens is the way to reduce violent crime when all the evidence points to the contrary.

  3. Ban them. Didn't banning guns stop all the drug related shootings in Toronto?

    The Libs choose to ignore drug laws. Think of this as hard reduction for farmers & ranchers.

  4. The bigger problem is illegal guns that are smuggled into Canada. This requires in part I suspect, a crackdown on the reserves that border the US. That didn't happen with a Liberal govt' nor will it (I doubt it will under a Conservative gov't either).

    The answer there is a stricter and better trained Border guards and patrol. I know how slack they are. I go across to the US frequently and a lot of the time they do not ask Canadians for IDs. They hold up border crossings with gossip regardless of how many vehicles are lined up. I had one incidence where after being across for over 48 hours. The only question that was asked of us was. You two haven't purchased more than $450, have you? No questions about how much liquor or how much tobacco.Polite though, He did wish us a good evening.

    Now that could explain a lot about smuggled guns into Canada and how simple it can be.

    As for farmers which we once were, Not having a permit does not prevent a farmer regardless of having too register their guns or not, the right to protect their livestock or themselves at any time. The redneck farmers claim that and those without common sense believe that crap. Senseless is more like it yet the Alliance Reform Crappers still beleive that BS. Go figure

    Another solution would be a crackdown on all Canaian borders and not only those bordering reserves with better trained Border guards.

  5. Who said anything about less guns? I fully support the right to have approved types of firearms (nothing like assault weapons) as long as they are registered. I can see how the implementation of the system could have been better managed. Now is the time to improve the gun registry instead of doing away with it.

    You can read about how the gun registry helps save lives here, here and, here.

    Besides, even if we are not sure if the gun registry saves lives or not, it is relatively cheap at a price of $11 million annually. That means we pay about 32 cents each year for the registry.

  6. Actually 10% of 1 billion dollars is still a lot.

    1000000000 x .1=100000000

  7. Also 1% of 1000000000= 10000000
    and 0.1% of 1000000000= 1000000

    That's quite a lot of money

  8. Moneyman has obviously not learned how to read and understand texts properly. Just spewing out random stuff, he could be illiterate.

  9. Please.. Your proof that the registry saves lives is nothing but a collection of editorials, letters to the editor or puff pieces. What's more, dismissing it as not costing much makes me pretty sure you work for government because no taxpayer would accept that reasoning.
    No. The registry was a political promise to Toronto that has become a boondoggle. I also find it funny that the same folks cursing the police for the G20 riots are much the same saying the police can be trusted to safeguard our rights.

  10. Generally everyone agrees with the steps a person must go through to obtain a firearm licence. Basically; for a person to obtain a firearm licence they must take a firearms- safety course and a back ground check or screening is performed on the person, ensuring the person is not a threat to the public’s safety. I take it the Conservatives have no problems with the process of licencing firearm owners; seeing as they haven’t yet tried to scrap it.

    From 2005 to 2009 an average of 430 people each year were refused a firearm licence; they were deemed to be a threat to public safety; here’s my question to those people who are against the long gun registry,(Tories) how many shootings or deaths have been prevented because these people were refused a firearm licence?

    From 2005 to 2009 an average of 2,000 people a year had their firearm licence revoked because those people were deemed to be a threat to public safety. These people not all; but most own long guns; these people must legally dispose of all of their firearms.

    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 firearms are not register how will the authorities be able to ensure all of the firearms will be legally disposed of if there are no records such as the registry and firearm certificates?

    What would make more sense to the law and order party is to question the high cost and effectiveness of screening people for their firearm licence instead of the minor cost of registering a firearm and its effectiveness. Some people pass the screening and later on have their firearm licence revoked because they become a threat to the public. Is the screening process broken?

    If the gun registry is scrapped then there’s no longer any firearm certificate for each firearm; by scrapping the registry the law and order party basically have no qualms about allowing the 2,000 people a year that had their firearm licence revoked to keep their firearms; or allow them to illegally transfer their firearms.

  11. Do you believe people should own firearms? Should law abiding Canadians be able to buy the firearm of their choice, be that rifle, shotgun or pistol?
    If the answer is "no" or "yes, but", then I think we have struck on the main stumbling block.

  12. ridenrain; can you show me in any of the Auditor General's reports of how much the long gun registry cost; show me exactly were she has said the long gun registry alone cost billions of dollars. Now if you are talking about the CFP over a 15 yr period; then that is different story. If you read up on the CFP you will see what our tax dollars paid for.

    The bulk of the money was used for screening and issuing firearm licenses; that cost would have taken place even if the Libs didn't bring in the long gun registry.

    Doesn't bother me one bit if a law abiding person legally purchases firearms; once they break the laws ie fail to register their firearms; or have their firearm licence revoked then I'm concerned. People who don’t register their firearms can do whatever they want with their firearms ie sell them illegally; or even keep them if they have their firearm licence revoked; for investigations purposes it’s much more easier and less expensive to trace back a firearm to the original owner if the firearm is registered.


Any highly offensive matter will be deleted whether it be solid, water, gas or plasma. No comments from outsiders represent the opinions of Owner and Doggy or vanillaman. We reserve the right to delete any comments without explanation.