imfdb.org - Since California and maybe the Feds want a long gun registry....

imfdb.org (http://forum.imfdb.org/index.php)

- Just Guns (http://forum.imfdb.org/forumdisplay.php?f=4)

- - Since California and maybe the Feds want a long gun registry.... (http://forum.imfdb.org/showthread.php?t=2158)

Since California and maybe the Feds want a long gun registry....

they may want to remember this gem

National Review 2-23-13
By Charles C. W. Cooke

Quote:

(Re: Canada's LONG gun Registry)
When, as the culmination of a piecemeal process that began in 1995, the registry was created in 2003, Canada’s parliament promised that its cost would not exceed $2 million. By 2012, the registry had cost taxpayers $2.7 billion — a 134,900 percent increase on projections. (In the U.S., a registry costing the same amount per person would run $67 billion over the same time.) For this considerable outlay, the government reaped a homicide rate that dropped more slowly than that of the United States, a country in which gun laws have been slowly liberalized; a collection of disillusioned (Canadian) police forces, whose budgets were being eaten up by the growing costs of gun registration; and an angry citizenry whose indignation, ... was serious enough to create a peculiar coalition of the Reform, Progressive, Conservative, and New Democratic parties and to wipe out the Liberal party in the West. The registry was abolished in 2012.

And these idiots here in the U.S. want to do the same thing. It is estimated that the cost of maintaining a LONG gun registry would cost OVER $67 Billion on the outset. This at a time when we're practically broke.

Ah yes, but the anti gun mindset is so flawed in many ways.

Not an entirely accurate article.... for the first 11 years of it's existence the registry was part of the Ministry of Public Safety and wasn't part of any police force's budget. In 2006 it was transfered to the RCMP to try and get the bureaucracy running more smoothly (successfully, in my opinion). The Association of Canadian Police Chiefs actually supported the registry, though most rank and file officers didn't.

The bit about the political parties is wrong, though. The Reform and Progressive Conservative parties were both right-wing parties, who merged in 2003 to become the Conservative Party. The New Democrats are our most left-wing mainstream party, and they actually supported the registry. They still maintain a little of their traditional rural roots (going back to the days when they were a Socialist party for small farmers), and rural Canadians were almost universally against the registry, but their current urban liberal base makes the party very much in favor of gun control. The point being there was never broad cross-political support for abolishing the registry, it was always a conservative issue.

They are right about one thing: the registry, espescially in the early days, was badly mismanaged and cost MUCH more than was originally foreseen, to the point where the initial claims of cost were probably fraudulent.

Thanks for the CANADIAN update :D It is good to have someone with more knowledge on Canadian history and politics will pick up on the errors.

Sorting out the political parties of different countries is mind boggling. I remember (now I forgot which one) where the "Liberal Democrat" party in that country is actually the 'hard right wing" party. Ugh. I wish the nations would at least adopt a consistent method of describing their own political parties. But then historically political groups have always misnamed themselves, for example, the NSDAP.