Glitch wipes out firearms records

[Tyler]

In my opinion, anyone who wants to go hunting should be restricted to shotguns/bolt action rifles. That way, it‘s fairer for the animal, safer for those who may be in the area, and there‘s a lot less brass to have clogging up the habitat.

I somehow doubt a deer or moose could tell the difference from a single round fired from a Lee-Enfield No.4, or an AR-10. Using restricted guns for hunting is illegal anyway. And depending on where you live, you must use a certain calibre to hunt game animals.

Just what do you mean by ‘fairer‘ to the animal?

Hunters tend to be conservationists. Most, if not all, pick up their brass, and only use one shot to kill anyway. Semi-auto rifles also allow for a quick follow-up shot should the animal not die instantly. Personally, I would not want an animal to suffer. It‘s a hunter‘s responsibility to deliver a clean kill. Besides, the more you shoot it, the more you spoil the meat.

If you really, really want to fire them, why not join the army?

Woo Hoo! Join the P.Res and get to use a C7 and maybe a C9 once a year. Besides, people who join just for weapons would find themselves very dissapointed. Most dedicated civilians fire more ammo per year than army type guys (res, or reg) and are much better marksmen because of it.

How many times have you used your weapon to fight off a home intruder? While you could say "It could happen one day, and then it‘d be worth it"

Why bother wearing my seatbelt? I‘ve never been in an accident? So why should I bother, right?

Owning a weapon strictly for self defence in Canada is a no-no anyway. More on that in a sec.

couldn‘t you also say "One day, someone could break into your house, steal it, and use it to murder someone"?

nULL, safe storage laws have been in effect for more than a decade. By law, all legal owners must have their guns locked up in an approved safe, with the ammo locked up in a different safe. So it would be hard for me to legally access my gun should someone invade my house. I would probably be dead before I could even load my gun. Since guns are locked up in the first place, criminals would have a hard time stealing them. Most guns used crimanally in Canada are illegal to begin with, having been smuggled in from the U.S., or so the Toronto Police say.

I think the underlying reasons for a gun registry are legit; while no criminals are going to register their guns, if everyone else DOES, wouldn‘t spotting the criminally owned firearms (and therefore the criminals) be markedly easier?

, sigh....

You don‘t need a registration paper to know if a gun a criminal has is legally owned or not. That‘s what a P.A.L or P.O.L. (gun license) is for, if an officer finds anyone with an unlocked, and loaded gun, that‘s illegal, if they don‘t have a license, it‘s safe to assume that that person has an illegaly owned firearm. If you find a pistol on them, it‘s even easier. Restricted guns (along with all guns) must be transported in a locked case with the ammo locked away seperately. Both in turn must be locked in a trunk or glove box when being transported. To transport a restricted weapon, you need an A.T.T. (transport permit) which is only valid on a certain route from your house to the range/club you belong to. If you want to transport your gun to a gunsmith to repair it, you need to file for another A.T.T. Should anyone be found in violation of any of this, it‘s also safe to assume that they are not a legal owner. No registry needed. The laws are restricted and costly enough without the registry in place. I could fill another page with different laws, but I would only tire myself out.

I do find it funny that most people who make fire arms policy in Canada and those who support it know jack-sh*t about guns, or the current laws.

Time for bed.

‘night all.


Tyler

 

[Tyler]

P.S.

No offence intended nULL.

P.S.S.

P.S. Wrong forum, but I applied online at the recruiting website...when are they supposed to get back to me? I‘ve called but there‘s been no answer both times. Thanks!

Need more info.

Where do you live?
What are you applying for? Reg? Reserve? What unit?
Have you been to the recruiting office in person? If not, do so.

Anyways, there is a ton of info on other forums on this board, I suggest you look into the recruiting forum, duh.

P.S.S. Joing the Army will take you a long time. Just ask anyone here. Like the gun registry, it‘s very inefficient.

Tyler

 

[Infanteer]

Owning a weapon strictly for self defence in Canada is a no-no anyway. More on that in a sec.

Better to be tried by 12 than carried out by 6.

 

[nULL]

Well Tyler, I‘ve been to the recruiting board, but it seems like time really does vary for everyone. I was hoping there was a member of the Canadian Scottish Regiment out there somewhere...for me, reserves is better because I wouldn‘t mind having a degree, and the only reason I haven‘t been down to the recruiting office is that it‘s rather far away, and I work during the week to afford that ever-growing tuition Oh, I applied online about...a month and a half ago? Once (if?) I was offered a position I was going to transfer to Uvic...

Back to the gun laws, you seemed to take it a bit personally. Make no mistake; I‘m pretty **** sure the army doesn‘t let psychos into their ranks. I‘m also hoping that they teach you how to use weapons in a responsible manner. I don‘t think any school, convenience store, or bank would get jittery knowing there was a soldier in the area.

I was talking more about the average Joe, such as myself (...for now), who may not be quite as aware of his civil responsibilities as most soldiers seem to be. Would it really be worth pleasing _________ number of gun owners just so that one day, a member of the RCMP could find himself outgunned? Where do you draw the line? Should civilians be able to aquire hollow-point ammunition, or armour piercing rounds? Should they be able to effectively negate the body armour that protects a memeber of the ERT? Or be given the chance to kill silently with a suppressor?

(For the record, I have no idea if HP rounds are illegal....pretty sure they are though)

I‘d just hate to see an RCMP officer get killed or crippled just because somebody wants to shoot bigger guns at a paper target.

Yes, if real criminals want automatic weapons they‘ll get them. But what about the scum off the street who just wants to make a few bucks fast? It‘s unlikely he could make the right connections fast enough to get anything more potent than a pistol.

But yeah, most of my opinions are formulated by being brought up in a Liberal household (hey, I like it that way!) I‘ve fired one gun in my life, a Glock 9mm, but will be the first one to admit I know ****-all after that.

Those North-Hollywood shootings had to make you think though....

 

[rw4th]

nULL,

Back to the gun laws, you seemed to take it a bit personally. Make no mistake; I‘m pretty **** sure the army doesn‘t let psychos into their ranks. I‘m also hoping that they teach you how to use weapons in a responsible manner. I don‘t think any school, convenience store, or bank would get jittery knowing there was a soldier in the area.

I’ve seen more soldiers and police officers do stupid things with their weapons then I’ve seen civilians. The military structure forces discipline on you, and as the saying goes “when the cat is away, the mice will play”.

I‘d just hate to see an RCMP officer get killed or crippled just because somebody wants to shoot bigger guns at a paper target.

Read the statistics, It’s not a question of being liberal or not, but of basing your decisions and opinions on facts rather then feelings. Criminals will not pay $5000 for an assault rifle and go through the whole registration process. They will buy a cheap pistol from some guy they know.

Not only that, but long guns account for 0% of firearms (legal or illegal) used in crimes. Criminals don’t use them because they cannot conceal them. Under your theory or preventing injury, it would do more good to ban knives (again read the statistics).

The current system is nothing more then a feel good solution; it does nothing to actually address the problem of rising violence. Basically what our society is saying is “I want to feel safe from violence”, but we feel powerless to stem the increasing use of guns by criminals, so in attempt to make ourselves feel better we exercise control over what we can; legally owned guns. The problem is that it does absolutely nothing the address the problem itself. Simply passing a law that says “all guns must be registered” won’t make criminals disarm themselves.

The real question you have to ask yourself is this: do I want to FEEL safe from violence, or do I want to BE safe from violence.

The current laws reflect the illusion of FEELING safe. They do nothing to increase our level of REAL safety from firearms violence. In fact statistics from countries like England and cities like New York City and LA, where they have some of the most restrictive firearms laws around, tend to demonstrate that, as firearms laws get more constrictive, criminal use of firearms and firearms related violence increases.

Read the facts and base your opinion on that, not on what makes you feel good.

 

[Tyler]

Good points, rw4th.

nULL sez:

Where do you draw the line? Should civilians be able to aquire hollow-point ammunition, or armour piercing rounds? Should they be able to effectively negate the body armour that protects a memeber of the ERT? Or be given the chance to kill silently with a suppressor?

Once again you demonstrated your lack of knowledge when it comes to firearms:

*supressors don‘t make a gun silent at all. And some supressors will actually make a gun less effective.

*"Armour Piercing" is just another liberal media hype phrase. All one needs to defeat most body armour is a hunting rifle chambered for .308 and up, using normal ball rounds (FMJ). Police vests are designed with the intent of stopping hand gun bullets because that is what they are most likely to encounter. I beleive it takes level IV body armour to stop a bullet from full sized rifle ammunition, and that armour is clumsy and very heavy.

*hollow point ammunition is no more deadly than normal ammunition. All it does is expand, and when it expands it won‘t penetrate as deep as FMJ ammo in the same calibre.

I was talking more about the average Joe, such as myself (...for now), who may not be quite as aware of his civil responsibilities as most soldiers seem to be.

That‘s what gun safety classes are for in the first place. To give average joes the knowledge to shoot a firearm safely.

Tyler

 

[muskrat89]

Granted, I‘ve been basking in a "gun happy" culture for awhile, but consider this - Anti-gun people are riding on the coattails of pro-gun owners. Why? A rhetorical point - if anti-gun people are so committed to what they do and believe, they should have no problem putting a sign on their front lawn proclaiming "There are no guns in this house". Think they would? I doubt it. They like the security of criminals knowing that some households might be armed.

I honestly believe that the real answer is somewhere in between the stance taken by the average (pro-gun) Canadian and the NRA. The NRA is a little too radical - the Cdn gun owners are too complacent(generally) to protect their rights.
I do belive that the US‘ 2nd Amendment is the original "Homeland Security", and the right to bear arms is kind of a neat concept.

Some topics on this forum have talked about defending Canada, and "guerilla warfare", etc. How effective will that be, if the Government has taken all of your weapons away. Especially civilians, who are usually the ones who end up guerillas, and "resistance fighters"

 

[nULL]

Uh oh, rapidly losing ground and any shred of credibility here....time for one last shot at it...

You said that most common criminals would not shell out the big bucks for expensive weapons. So, would you agree that it must be harder for any old Joe to get ahold of small, easily conceilable firearms?

And I thought suppressors DID muffle the sound...I watched a video with a guy firing an MP5SD5 with subsonic ammunition, all you could hear was this clicking.

I realize I‘m not the best person to argue this point; I know very little about firearms, and have never researched the topic with any real effort (unlike some of you, I‘ve never had a reason). Still, I still don‘t believe that without easy access to firearms, people would still commit as many violent crimes.

ne4th, you seem to enjoy research; would you happen to know how many people were killed in domestic disputes last year? How many of those were with some kind of firearm? How many police were shot last year, as opposed to stabbed/bludgeoned? How many banks were robbed by a felon wielding a knife or a broomstick?

 

[muskrat89]

So, with registration, those types of crimes should be down to zero, next year. Right, nULL?

 

[nULL]

The point of such programs isn‘t to eliminate such crimes, it‘s to reduce them.

 

[muskrat89]

Oh, I see

 

[Bringer]

Still, I still don‘t believe that without easy access to firearms, people would still commit as many violent crimes.

Britain has harsher gun control laws than Canada and has a much higher violent crime rate. Guns don‘t make people violent. After you ban guns, are you going to ban knives? Once knives are gone, are you going to ban sticks?

I think the lumber industry might prove to be a better lobbiest than the gun owners, so you‘ll have a bit of trouble with that legislation...

 

[nULL]

Lol, like I said, I‘ve lost this arguement; but you never answered my questions:

Japan has harsher gun control laws than Britain...and there are many, MANY fewer gun-related deaths.

IN CANADA, were access to handguns restricted to a select few, do YOU think that the amount of violent crimes (especially domestic related) would be affected?

 

[muskrat89]

Criminals don‘t register their guns. Nor do they usually purchase firearms through legal means.

Japan‘s culture is different than ours in a LOT of ways.

 

[rw4th]

You said that most common criminals would not shell out the big bucks for expensive weapons. So, would you agree that it must be harder for any old Joe to get a hold of small, easily concealable firearms?

They already are, and have been for quite a while

ne4th, you seem to enjoy research; would you happen to know how many people were killed in domestic disputes last year? How many of those were with some kind of firearm? How many police were shot last year, as opposed to stabbed/bludgeoned? How many banks were robbed by a felon wielding a knife or a broomstick?

Firstly, look at the link I posted earlier, that will give you an idea. Secondly, you’re not listening: to make any point about firearms related crime valid, you have separate the incidents into those committed using LEGAL and ILLEGAL firearms. The current laws only affect the first group, the LEGALLY owned firearms.

 

[The Gues-|-]

If NWEST or somesuch quasi gestapo organization is doing an unwarrented inspection of your home (and they can), and they find so much as a single empty shell casing out of a safe, they can charge you with careless storage and take away all of your guns. So someone with no criminal record will be treated like a common criminal. This is absurd.

NWEST = gestapo? hardly.  I'd like to know where you got your information regarding the "unwarrented inspection" part.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

You may get an answer, but don't sit there hoping. Tyler made that post in June 2003, and he has not been active here since June 2005. You may have a bit of a wait.

 

[Meatpuppet]

Are you kidding me...Others i know like myself are armed to the teeth....Jesus what world do most of you live in?What is this canadains are decent people..(WE really are).we are the wing nuts of the north...jesus i cant imagine if all Canadains had real guns..ahahahah....no disrespect to the RCMP that were killed in Alberta...but that asshole took out 4.(surprised or not)..shows Canadain spirit....sorry no offense...but it is reality.

 

[Stupor]

Are you kidding me...Others i know like myself are armed to the teeth....Jesus what world do most of you live in?What is this canadains are decent people..(WE really are).we are the wing nuts of the north...jesus i cant imagine if all Canadains had real guns..ahahahah....no disrespect to the RCMP that were killed in Alberta...but that ******* took out 4.(surprised or not)..shows Canadain spirit....sorry no offense...but it is reality.

I don't quite understand your point. Can you clarify?

 

[Slim]

....no disrespect to the RCMP that were killed in Alberta...but that ******* took out 4.(surprised or not)..shows Canadain spirit....sorry no offense...but it is reality.

Canadian Spirit?!

No, sorry but it doesn't.

All it shows is some a$$hole who can't stand being told what to do and what rules to follow acting out like a child having a temper tamntrum, only with guns.

Guns he never should have had.

I think both as a mod and as a police officer you owe this bard an apology. I could quite easily put you on the warning system for what you said above. I'm not going to because I don't think you realized just what you were saying.

Time to wake up and be responsible for your words.

Slim
STAFF