The Great Gun Control Debate

[Fishbone Jones]

Apparently, Glen McGregor of the Ottawa Citizen will be publishing the registry online...

http://bcblue.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/citizens-mcgregor-is-posting-7million-gun-registries-records-on-line/

http://afewtastefulsnaps.net/?p=1365

Anyone else see any privacy and/or legal issues with doing this?

The Ottawa Citizen did this, IIRC, a couple of years ago. They obtained access to partial records through an FOI request. It's not the full registry. You can see types of firearms by postal code. Unfortunately, some postal codes only contain one building. At the time they published it, they put it online so that you could play around interactively. It was challenged and the court decided that there was not enough info provided to create a concern. The RCMP were fully complicit in this and freely gave up the info without caveat.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

As I understand it - it was before my time - before C-68 passed, getting a handgun permit (ie, a Restricted PAL) involved an actual interview where you had to go to the Local Constabulary and actually present yourself as an applicant and explain yourself. I don't see that as being a bad thing. Nor do I see a bit more detail in background checking as being especially intrusive. Hell, I know for a fact that they don't really follow the rules as they exist. I had no problem buying my first pistol (a POS Norinco NP18 that jammed EVERY SINGLE ROUND) from someone else, claiming I was an avid target shooter despite not belonging to a club.

Before C-68 there was no PAL, it was the FAC. My initial FAC interview lasted less than 5 minute and was done by the secretary filling out my form. Never had one after that.

No where in C-68 does it stipulate you have to belong to a club to possess a restricted. That is an arbitrary rule made up by the local CFO. That is the crux of the problem. No one at any one time can be sure of the rules. C-68 contradicts itself, CFOs make up rules as they go along and most police don't take the PAL training so they are not even aware of the legal rules to use, transport or store. They just grab, charge and wait for the Crown to sort it out. The whole time, the onus is on the owner to prove himself innocent, contrary to the Charter, instead of the Crown proving them guilty.



The existing application is already more intrusive than, probably, any application out there.

 

[Redeye]

That's true - it's the ATT process that imposes those "rules", isn't it? And Ontario, as I recall, is the most ridiculous about them. I don't know about NS - I've not been out to a range with my own stuff since I moved here, and I sold most of it when I moved anyhow.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

That's true - it's the ATT process that imposes those "rules", isn't it? And Ontario, as I recall, is the most ridiculous about them. I don't know about NS - I've not been out to a range with my own stuff since I moved here, and I sold most of it when I moved anyhow.

The LTATT lets you go to CFO authorized ranges with restricted firearms. A STATT can be given to non ORA members to use particular military ranges outside the CFO pervue.

There is no law saying you have to belong to a club to get an ATT (either type, long or short term). It's a CFO 'made up' rule with no legal authority from the Feds or through C-68.

Just another "I'll do what I want" CFO whim. You won't even see the same rules applied across the country by different Provincial CFOs. Just whatever they decide they want to do at the time. Quebec and Ontario are the most drachonian, with la belle province far outstripping Ontario when it comes to bullshit and hoops.

 

[ballz]

That's true - it's the ATT process that imposes those "rules", isn't it?

No. I purchased an AR15 before knowing these BS rules about being a member of a range or being a collector. The RCMP wouldn't even let me register the rifle in my name without either applying to be a collector (which I was informed would take about 4 weeks to go through) or becoming a full member of the range (in other words, had to wait the 90-day probationary period first) and registering it as a target shooter.

I think the fact that I, as a law-abiding citizen, needs to provide a reason as to why I want to buy an AR15 or a pistol is insulting enough. I was also asked when applying for my R-PAL "Why do you want a R-PAL?" I've never committed a crime or harmed a human being. Go harass a crack dealer about why he's got a 9mm tucked under shirt.

Regarding that, and the title of the thread,
"We see up close and personal what happens when guns are used on people. Nobody knows more than paramedics the damage that guns can do, and we are strong advocates of gun control."
Peter MacIntyre, Manager of Community Safeguard Services for Toronto EMS.
Globe and Mail
30 June 2006
The Manager of Community Safeguard Services is an official media spokesperson for T-EMS.

So what? He's uncomfortable with people having guns. I'm uncomfortable with various all religions, too. My comfort level doesn't trump their rights.


If you want gun control, I suggest you start advocating for better policing of the border.

"Illegal smuggling by organized crime is by far the principal source of firearms on our streets. Indeed, the Vancouver police report that 97 percent of firearms seized in 2003 were illegal guns smuggled in from the United States, usually by organized crime" (Vancouver Police, Strategic plan 2004-08)

http://leonbenoit.ca/?section_id=5284&section_copy_id=65433&tpid=3639


As opposed to a registry:

It has been mandatory to register handguns (a "restricted" class of firearm with tighter controls than long-guns) since 1934, but in 2007 Statistics Canada reported  "the use of handguns has generally been increasing since the mid-1980s," and "of the 188 firearms used to commit homicide in 2007, two-thirds were handguns." From 1990 to 2005, the percentage of homicides committed with handguns doubled despite the long-standing registry that they were already subject to.

Li, Geoffrey. "Homicide in Canada, 2007." Statistics Canada n. pag. Web. 4 Apr 2011. <http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002- x/2008009/article/10671-eng.htm>.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Regarding that, and the title of the thread,
"We see up close and personal what happens when guns are used on people. Nobody knows more than paramedics the damage that guns can do, and we are strong advocates of gun control."Peter MacIntyre, Manager of Community Safeguard Services for Toronto EMS.
Globe and Mail
30 June 2006
The Manager of Community Safeguard Services is an official media spokesperson for T-EMS.

Really? How does he quantify that. Soldiers don't see gunshot wounds, Doctors and nurses don't. I know a civvie doctor that has seen, and treated, more gunshots than 10 of your paramedics have seen or likely will ever. Guess he's a nobody according to your spokesman.

Are your members so feeble and sheep like that this one person speaks for all of you?

Plain and simple, more ignorant, fabricated hyperboyle. It holds about as much weight as Ken Lewenza spews on the subject for the CAW.

 

[Redeye]

Plain and simple, more ignorant, fabricated hyperboyle. It holds about as much weight as Ken Lewenza spews on the subject for the CAW.

Or the assertion that Tony Bernardo from CSSA speaks for me. I don't pay dues to CSSA because I particularly like the organization, but because I have to in order to be a member of a club. See what I did there?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Or the assertion that Tony Bernardo from CSSA speaks for me. I don't pay dues to CSSA because I particularly like the organization, but because I have to in order to be a member of a club. See what I did there?

Most progressive clubs will allow you to belong to which ever organisation you wish as long as you are insured, for shooting, through them. In Ontario that would also include the OFAH and IIRC a couple of others. Other provinces have similar. Join the one that best suits your needs. If your club is full of Fudds and not progressive, try find one that is closer to your tastes.

As with all things in life, the ultimate choice is yours. No one can make you do anything you don't want too.

 

[Loachman]

I think the fact that I, as a law-abiding citizen, needs to provide a reason as to why I want to buy an AR15 or a pistol is insulting enough.

The only justification that should be necessary is that you are a free citizen in a free country and you want one.

 

[mariomike]

So what? He's uncomfortable with people having guns. I'm uncomfortable with various all religions, too. My comfort level doesn't trump their rights.


If you want gun control, I suggest you start advocating for better policing of the border.

"Illegal smuggling by organized crime is by far the principal source of firearms on our streets. Indeed, the Vancouver police report that 97 percent of firearms seized in 2003 were illegal guns smuggled in from the United States, usually by organized crime" (Vancouver Police, Strategic plan 2004-08)

http://leonbenoit.ca/?section_id=5284&section_copy_id=65433&tpid=3639


As opposed to a registry:

It has been mandatory to register handguns (a "restricted" class of firearm with tighter controls than long-guns) since 1934, but in 2007 Statistics Canada reported  "the use of handguns has generally been increasing since the mid-1980s," and "of the 188 firearms used to commit homicide in 2007, two-thirds were handguns." From 1990 to 2005, the percentage of homicides committed with handguns doubled despite the long-standing registry that they were already subject to.

Li, Geoffrey. "Homicide in Canada, 2007." Statistics Canada n. pag. Web. 4 Apr 2011. <http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002- x/2008009/article/10671-eng.htm>.

As the Community Safeguard Services manager, he was designated to speak of departmental policy when requested by the media.
EMS seems in line with other health care professions, such as the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians:
http://caep.ca/sites/default/files/caep/files/Open_letter04-28-HealthGroupsSupportGunControl_FINAL.pdf

Regards.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

As the Community Safeguard Services manager, he was designated to speak of departmental policy when requested by the media.
EMS seems in line with other health care professions, such as the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians:
http://caep.ca/sites/default/files/caep/files/Open_letter04-28-HealthGroupsSupportGunControl_FINAL.pdf

Regards.

You still didn't answer my questions. Except the one where he can say whatever he wants and you tow the line.

 

[ballz]

As the Community Safeguard Services manager, he was designated to speak of departmental policy when requested by the media.
EMS seems in line with other health care professions, such as the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians:
http://caep.ca/sites/default/files/caep/files/Open_letter04-28-HealthGroupsSupportGunControl_FINAL.pdf

Regards.

What is your point exactly? What makes a doctors / paramedics / nurses / etc / etc / etc worth more than actual data? What does their knowledge of healthcare have to do with stopping crime? When did they become the authority on everything? Should we ask them for their opinion on economic reform too?

You completely ignored all the actual data I put forward and the content in my post. I can't have a conversation with someone who's got their eyes closed and hands over their ears.

EDIT: I can't wait to hear what I'm going to hear in 2-4 years after the LGR is gone and homicide trends haven't changed... A deafening silence.

 

[ModlrMike]

EDIT: I can't wait to hear what I'm going to hear in 2-4 years after the LGR is gone and homicide trends haven't changed... A deafening silence.

Looking at the homicide rate here (LINK) one can see there's been no statistical change from 1994-2006 (the LGR was implemented in 2001). Homicides in Canada have been on the decline since 1991 as a whole, and have followed the same trajectory since. Granted, the table does not specify gun related homicides over other types.

 

[ballz]

Looking at the homicide rate here (LINK) one can see there's been no statistical change from 1994-2006 (the LGR was implemented in 2001). Homicides in Canada have been on the decline since 1991 as a whole, and have followed the same trajectory since. Granted, the table does not specify gun related homicides over other types.

I'm well aware they haven't changed. That is the whole point anti-LGR have been making since it's inception to support that the LGR hasn't done anything.

Now, if we are to believe the pro-LGR people then after the LGR is scrapped that trend would change to an increase in homocides. It won't. It will continue to decline as if nothing ever happened, just like when the LGR was introduced.

 

[The Bread Guy]

A newer message track, from a former Ontario Attorney General:

.... Most firearm deaths in Canada are suicides (over 75 per cent). Only 24 per cent are homicides. Suicides in Canada will go up if the Prime Minister isn’t careful about what he repeals.

I’ve been involved in gun control debates for a long time. Admittedly, some of my too-clever rhetoric took away from the important public safety ideas behind the federal gun registry. “The Conservatives are in the holster of the gun lobby,” he quips. I truly believe in the slogan a bunch of us Liberals coined: “No gun, no funeral.”

The website and badges we handed out drove pro-gun activists crazy, and we revelled in our partisanship. It’s a fact that more guns in a jurisdiction mean more deaths. Exhibit A: U.S.A. It’s true that most illegal guns start as legal guns. Ask the police, who access the registry thousands of times, every day.

Be that as it may, gun control supporters like me may have placed too much focus on gun crime itself. Bad guys and good guys. Some couldn’t tell whether gun controllers like me were equating hunters and gun collectors with the bad guys. We should have plucked out the one thing about the gun registry that no one can dispute.

Suicides. Suicides dropped dramatically in Canada thanks to the federal gun registry. Not only do statistics prove as much, it stands to reason that with improved gun safety comes decreased gun fatalities; with fewer tools-of-choice for suicides available, fewer suicides occur. It just makes sense ....

This from the group representing emergency room docs, via CTV.ca:

The Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians says the gun registry issue is not one of crime prevention, but of suicide prevention.

"As a rural emergency physician and coroner, I can safely say that I've never seen a handgun injury. I have however seen my share of injuries and deaths inflicted by rifles and shotguns. I have felt the pain of investigating a double murder-suicide as a result of escalating domestic violence. Suicide, contrary to public opinion, is often an impulsive gesture. Keeping guns away from depressed people is essential," Dr. Alan Drummond said in an open letter to Parliament ....

Probably being used because of all the recent media and House of Commons attention paid to the issue of suicide.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Well Mr. Bryant is full of kife, I wonder how much time a lawyer spends on suicide prevention training? 

Yes a gun may be a better tool for the job but there are many other tools available and at least it doesn't bring danger or nightmares to folks who have to witness someone jumping into traffic or in front of a train................

Much as I think all guns should be registered I can see why, between the harrassment/ ineptness and completly illogical arguements like this the gun folks can get way offside most all of the time.

 

[ballz]

A newer message track, from a former Ontario Attorney General:
This from the group representing emergency room docs, via CTV.ca:
Probably being used because of all the recent media and House of Commons attention paid to the issue of suicide.

I knew that suicide was the #1 firearm-related death in Canada by a long shot, so in writing my paper I looked for suicide stats but I couldn't find any (I'm not great with google), so I'd like to see the stats that the former Ont AG is referring to (the stats about the "dramatically" reduced suicide rate "thanks to the gun registry"). He is absolutely incorrect in saying that "most illegal guns start off as legal guns" because most illegal guns in Canada *ARE* smuggled across the border (as I have already shown) so they were never legal within Canada.

Secondly, I would most-likely attribute them to the storage laws that were introduced, which I don't think (correct me if I'm wrong) are going to be changed with getting rid of the LGR. I do believe that suicide is impulsive because the medical folks say so, and as was explained to me, the storage laws are designed to create barriers between someone that is impulsively wanting to commit suicide and obtaining a firearm that would obviously not give any time for that impulse to pass.

I also take anybody that refers to themselves as "too clever" with a grain of salt, especially one that declares his own arguments as "facts" and tries to use the USA argument to support his declared fact.

EDIT: Sorry I didn't realize there was so much more to that article. It's ridiculously biased, misleading, and the stats it points to don't prove SFA.

A home where there are firearms is five times more likely to be the scene of a suicide than a home without a gun: Canada Safety Council.

Okay? WTF does this have to do with a reduced suicide rate?

The Institut national de sante publique du Québec has assessed that the coming into force of the Firearms Act is associated, on average, with a reduction of 250 suicides (and 50 homicides) each year in Canada. That’s nearly one life saved per day.

Oh I see, the 1995 Firearms Act... so what does that have to do with the 2001 LGR?

StatsCan figures are stark: firearm suicides have dropped 48 per cent since the enactment of the very law that the Conservatives seek to repeal.

Would like to know if he's talking about the Firearms Act or the LGR, and also if the Conservatives are repealing the entire Firearms Act like he's implying, or just the LGR.

 

[ballz]

I wish I would have had these stats for my paper.

Total suicides in Canada per year:

1998: 3698
2000: 3606
2001: 3692
2002: 3650
2003: 3765
2004: 3613
2005: 3743
2006: 3512
2007: 3611
2008: 3705

Yeah, looks like it'd make a pretty flat line to me too.........

Sources:
1998: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/studies-etudes/82-003/feature-caracteristique/5018873-eng.pdf
2000-2003: http://www.imfcanada.org/article_files/Canadian%20Suicide%20Statistics.pdf
2004-2008: http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/hlth66a-eng.htm

It appears to me (from the graphs here http://www.statcan.gc.ca/studies-etudes/82-003/feature-caracteristique/5018873-eng.pdf) that the 1995 Firearms Act *did* reduce suicides, which is great, but the LGR in 2001 has had *no* affect.

EDIT to add a bunch of stuff

 

[mariomike]

What makes a doctors / paramedics / nurses / etc / etc / etc worth more than actual data? What does their knowledge of healthcare have to do with stopping crime?

Ballz, I did read the link you posted. And your other posts as well.

Because of memories, I found this of interest, "The Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians says the gun registry issue is not one of crime prevention, but of suicide prevention."
I think they said 75% of gun deaths are suicide. Most of the ones I saw never made it to the ER.

I understand if a gun is not available, they may instead jump off a subway platform. Or, the Viaduct ( before they made it jump proof ). From what I have read, they plan on doing the same with the subway. When they come up with the money.
That was also a major political battle, at the municipal level.

I read the police services, chiefs and associations position on the subject. ( I understand officers are under a "gag order".  The S.O.P.s I served under said the same thing: "EMS personnel represent the City of Toronto. Therefore, they must not use their position, status or uniform to express their personal opinion on any given policy matter." Perhaps it's a misguided sense of loyalty, but even though it no longer applies to me, I would prefer to keep it that way. )

 

[The Bread Guy]

I wish I would have had these stats for my paper.

Total suicides in Canada per year:

1998: 3698
2000: 3606
2001: 3692
2002: 3650
2003: 3765
2004: 3613
2005: 3743
2006: 3512
2007: 3611
2008: 3705

Yeah, looks like it'd make a pretty flat line to me too.........

Sources:
1998: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/studies-etudes/82-003/feature-caracteristique/5018873-eng.pdf
2000-2003: http://www.imfcanada.org/article_files/Canadian%20Suicide%20Statistics.pdf
2004-2008: http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/hlth66a-eng.htm

It appears to me (from the graphs here http://www.statcan.gc.ca/studies-etudes/82-003/feature-caracteristique/5018873-eng.pdf) that the 1995 Firearms Act *did* reduce suicides, which is great, but the LGR in 2001 has had *no* affect.

See attached graph o' your numbers (with linear trend line in red)