Liberals will vote against Tory gun law: Ignatieff

[train]

The basic problem here is that those that want to scrap the long gun registry do not believe that it accomplishes anything in terms of either reducing crime or in identifying perps. I have never seen any results of studies from any source that proved it did so you have to be suspicious about its effectiveness. Given that we can't have everything that we want haven't we got better things to spend money on at than this?
Why do I wonder that if it had been the Conservatives who had introduced this and thrown away billions on it the Libs would be stamping their feet about waste and how "over the top" and predictable the Conservative law and order agenda was. Once again we have made it a political issue when it should be evaluated on its effectiveness vs it's cost.

 

[danmand]

The basic problem here is that those that want to scrap the long gun registry do not believe that it accomplishes anything in terms of either reducing crime or in identifying perps. I have never seen any results of studies from any source that proved it did you have to be suspicious about its effectiveness. Given that we can't have everything that we want haven't we got better things to spend money on at than this?
Why do I wonder that if it had been the Conservatives who had introduced this and thrown away billions on it the Libs would be stamping their feet about waste and how "over the top" and predictable the Conservative law and order agenda was. Once again we have made it a political issue when it should be evaluated on its effectiveness vs it's cost.

It is what may be called "canadian political logic": The gun registry cost too much to build, so it has to be scrapped,
even if it does not cost anything to run.

 

[blackrock13]

It is what may be called "canadian political logic": The gun registry cost too much to build, so it has to be scrapped,
even if it does not cost anything to run.

Wha? Where do you get that from? See my post #38 point #8.

Try $64 million annually.

 

[train]

It is what may be called "canadian political logic": The gun registry cost too much to build, so it has to be scrapped,
even if it does not cost anything to run.

Are you sure that is true ? Somehow I doubt it. Don't forget its run by civil servants

Try $64 million annually.

Seems like a lot to spend unless you know its accomplishing something worth that.

 

[fuji]

Given that we can't have everything that we want haven't we got better things to spend money on at than this?

It's relatively cheap to maintain going forward. The exorbitant development costs are water under the bridge at this point.

Once again we have made it a political issue when it should be evaluated on its effectiveness vs it's cost.

It should never have cost as much as it cost, but that had to do with poor financial management and nothing to do with the effectiveness or concept of a gun registry. It should have and could have been built for 1/20th of what we wound up paying for it.

 

[landscaper]

If you'd recently used your weapon to shoot someone, you'd probably get rid of it as soon as possible. So when the police dropped by for a polite chat and asked if you'd mind showing them your weapon,

What probably cause would the police have for interviewing everybody who owned a similar weapon? I would have to see a warrant issued on such grounds to believe it. The idea that you could be targeted for interviews based on the ownership of a weapon sis one of the reasons that a lot of people don't like this registry. It is the same thing as if you owned a Buick that was similar to the debris found at an accident scene. The police as a rule don't pull the registration for all those vehicals and start interviewing people.
As far as Fujis point about having balistics tests or at least a couple of fired rounds available for testing of all purchased weapons its not a bad idea, but again point is who pays for it?
you only suggested that because you're letting your politics put crazy thoughts in your head.

Maybee you should read all the posts in the thread you might find find some illumination.

 

[blackrock13]

It's relatively cheap to maintain going forward. The exorbitant development costs are water under the bridge at this point.



It should never have cost as much as it cost, but that had to do with poor financial management and nothing to do with the effectiveness or concept of a gun registry. It should have and could have been built for 1/20th of what we wound up paying for it.

Back to your old habit of pulling figures out of thin air again are you Fuji? it's $3 million a year right now

//www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/westview/canadian-police-want-to-keep-gun-registry-going-42251022.html

The other problem is that the registry has been riddled with errors from the start, as high as 90% and not improved much over the years and maybe averaging 50%.


JUSTICE DEPT. DOCUMENTS SHOW ERROR RATES OF 71% TO 91% IN GUN REGISTRY: On March 19, 2002, the Department of Justice sent documents to Garry Breitkreuz, MP, in response to an Access to Information Act request (DoJ File: A-2000-0209. In “Background material to assist the Canadian Firearms Program Advisory Committee to advise Minister McLellan for the purpose of Submissions to Treasury Board or Social Union Committee” dated April 28, 2000 (page 3) titled, STATISTICS – LICENCES: 71% ERROR RATE – REGISTRATIONS 91% ERROR RATE.

Do you think a cop is going to trust the information found on the registry?

 

[fuji]

Back to your old habit of pulling figures out of thin air again are you Fuji? it's $3 million a year right now

Yes, $3 million a year, which is relatively cheap, don't you think? The exorbitant billion dollar costs are a thing of the past.

 

[GotGusto]

I wish I could just walk into a gun shop, buy a gun, and be on my merry way.

 

[blackrock13]

Yes, $3 million a year, which is relatively cheap, don't you think? The exorbitant billion dollar costs are a thing of the past.

For something that is wrong 50-90% of the time, yes that's too much.

 

[blackrock13]

I wish I could just walk into a gun shop, buy a gun, and be on my merry way.

Now I'm worried.

 

[fuji]

For something that is wrong 50-90% of the time, yes that's too much.

For the record, roughly how many convenience stores do you think you need in a chain to create a $3 million business? We are not talking about a lot of money. If it has problems that's a different question.

 

[danmand]

Yes, $3 million a year, which is relatively cheap, don't you think? The exorbitant billion dollar costs are a thing of the past.

Exactly. And it should not have cost more than $50M to create it. But the political demagoguery says: "It cost way too much to
build it, therefore we must scrap it". I think the conservatives will get away with it, because logic is not a strong point of canadians.

 

[blackrock13]

For the record, roughly how many convenience stores do you think you need in a chain to create a $3 million business? We are not talking about a lot of money. If it has problems that's a different question.

What with this 'for the record'? WTF does that have to do with wasting $3 million a year on something that wrong more than it's right.

Stop going off on a tangent and pull in the argument of saving a convenient store robbery makes that $3 million worth it. If you spend money, and sorry Fuji $3 million is a lot of money, and you might get what you want 50% of the time AT BEST, would you be happy? I think not.

 

[blackrock13]

Exactly. And it should not have cost more than $50M to create it. But the political demagoguery says: "It cost way too much to
build it, therefore we must scrap it". I think the conservatives will get away with it, because logic is not a strong point of canadians.

They're not saying scrap it. They saying change it. Yet it could have been done right in the first place and it wasn't, money was wasted from the start. I know I'm not going to believe information that anyone gets from it, with it having a 50/50 chance of being wrong 'AT BEST'.

 

[danmand]

They're not saying scrap it. They saying change it. Yet it could have been done right in the first place and it wasn't, money was wasted from the start. I know I'm not going to believe information that anyone gets from it, with it having a 50/50 chance of being wrong 'AT BEST'.

You are confirming what I said, exactly.

 

[blackrock13]

You are confirming what I said, exactly.

I am?

You said they said, 'scrap it'. I said they said, 'change it'. How's dat the same? (scratching head)

 

[fuji]

What with this 'for the record'? WTF does that have to do with wasting $3 million a year on something that wrong more than it's right.

Stop going off on a tangent and pull in the argument of saving a convenient store robbery makes that $3 million worth it. If you spend money, and sorry Fuji $3 million is a lot of money, and you might get what you want 50% of the time AT BEST, would you be happy? I think not.

I'm saying that $3 million is a reasonable cost for something like a gun registry. It might seem like a lot of money to you, but maybe you have not had a lot of experience managing operations either in business or in government. In the private sector $3 million describes the funding and ancillary office expenses of between a 20 and 30 person organization depending on salaries.

 

[danmand]

I'm saying that $3 million is a reasonable cost for something like a gun registry. It might seem like a lot of money to you, but maybe you have not had a lot of experience managing operations either in business or in government. In the private sector $3 million describes the funding and ancillary office expenses of between a 20 and 30 person organization depending on salaries.

Try 15-20.

 

[train]

So we are several posts into this now.

1 guy says its $3 million but he has a history of just making things up. Very rarely does something that cost $2 billion to put in place only cost $3 million to maintain. Another says $15 to $20 million and a third says $64 million.

So its been clearly established then that no one is really certain as to what it costs to maintain to say nothing of how long it is until we have to update the systems.

On top of that no one knows how effective this registry is in preventing or solving crime. Even anecdotally no one has put forward one case that was solved by the registry.

In summary we don't know what it costs and we don't know how effective it is but there seems to be a lot of strong opinions based on absolutely nothing.