>"So you're fine with your government spending $2 Billion >on something that is to buy votes of the left but do >absolutely nothing with regards to actually stopping criminal >activity?"
I'm not fine with the government wasting *any* money but you know as well as I do that it happens. As with any political initiave, there are flaws in the gun registry. I do not think that necessarily makes it a failure. Have you ever seen a government put something together that did *not* have problems?
Now, as far as that 2 billion dollars goes, I repeat: Over how many years? Big numbers are impressive but context is important. Currently, the gun registry and it's enforcement costs about 100 million a year. Again, that's one of those numbers that's big for me but really a pitance for the people in charge.
What's more, this is not really an issue of right versus left in the way that you're thinking. This is an issue of city living versus rural living. Though those two groups have a certain demarcation along the left and right, it certainly isn't the same thing.
Politicians push this issue because it is one that is important to people living in cities. Because they are the ones who have to deal with crime and gang violence. The population is also, of course, concentrated in within the cities so they also form a huge voting block. Something close to one third of the population of canada lives in the cities of Toronto and Montreal.
But, more importantly, does it have an impact? Well, that's hard to tell. The reason isn't necessarily because the impact is minuscule but rather because it is difficult to find the links of causality in a situation like this. The fact that politicians on both sides of the equation try to muddy the issue doesn't help either.
We do know, however, that the rates of homicide are much less in Canada than in the US (8.8 per 100k in the US, 2.3 per 100k in CA) and that over 65% of homicides in the US involved firearms compared with 32% in Canada.
So that seems to indicate that the country is doing something right about guns. But, again, that could be attributed to many things.
Are homicides more common in the US because of the easier access to guns? Well, the argument could easily be upheld by the statistics but who know if that's the case.
Until proper statistics are released for the years 2000-2006, we won't really be able to tell if the new legislation has made much of an impact.
But saying that it does nothing with regards to stopping criminal activity is a misleading statement.
Crime is mostly the result of poverty, not guns or lack thereof. Does regulating firearms prevent crime? Well, no.
It does seem to have an impact on gun crimes and homicide.
>"Amnesty for long guns, you mean the amnesty where the provincial >police in 5 territories have refused to enforce/operate the >registration system for long guns because it's just too much > headache for no effective result?"
Again, that's misleading. There are only 3 provinces/territories with their own police force. That's Ontario, Quebec and Newfoundland. The rest is under the umbrella of the mounties. So what we're talking about is a decision by the RCMP.
And the RCMP's actions were not a decision based on lack of enforceability or results. Harper declared the amnesty, their job is to go along with it.
Is it difficult to enforce registration of long guns? Depends. It is in some areas, like the northwest territories. Does it have much of an impact on street crime? Probably not. Again, we're generally talking about more rural areas.
I don't think this invalidates firearms registration in any way. Hindsight is 20/20, as they say. That's why we have mechanisms in place to change legislation. I don't really see the point of scraping the entire act because part of it should perhaps be revised. Throwing out the baby with the bathwater, isn't it?
>"$2 Billion is not an obscene amount of money for a complete >waste of time?"
Again, that's emotional and manipulative language. Sure, 2 billion is obscene for a complete waste of time. But there's nothing to say that firearms registration is a complete waste of time.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
zvi
(no subject)
Date: 2006-09-28 08:27 pm (UTC)>on something that is to buy votes of the left but do
>absolutely nothing with regards to actually stopping criminal
>activity?"
I'm not fine with the government wasting *any* money but you
know as well as I do that it happens. As with any political
initiave, there are flaws in the gun registry. I do not think
that necessarily makes it a failure. Have you ever seen a
government put something together that did *not* have problems?
Now, as far as that 2 billion dollars goes, I repeat: Over how
many years? Big numbers are impressive but context is important.
Currently, the gun registry and it's enforcement costs about 100
million a year. Again, that's one of those numbers that's big
for me but really a pitance for the people in charge.
What's more, this is not really an issue of right versus left
in the way that you're thinking. This is an issue of city living
versus rural living. Though those two groups have a certain
demarcation along the left and right, it certainly isn't the
same thing.
Politicians push this issue because it is one that is important
to people living in cities. Because they are the ones who have
to deal with crime and gang violence. The population is also,
of course, concentrated in within the cities so they also form
a huge voting block. Something close to one third of the
population of canada lives in the cities of Toronto and Montreal.
But, more importantly, does it have an impact? Well, that's
hard to tell. The reason isn't necessarily because the impact
is minuscule but rather because it is difficult to find the
links of causality in a situation like this. The fact that
politicians on both sides of the equation try to muddy the issue
doesn't help either.
We do know, however, that the rates of homicide are much less
in Canada than in the US (8.8 per 100k in the US, 2.3 per 100k
in CA) and that over 65% of homicides in the US involved
firearms compared with 32% in Canada.
So that seems to indicate that the country is doing something
right about guns. But, again, that could be attributed to many
things.
Are homicides more common in the US because of the easier
access to guns? Well, the argument could easily be upheld by
the statistics but who know if that's the case.
Until proper statistics are released for the years 2000-2006,
we won't really be able to tell if the new legislation has made
much of an impact.
But saying that it does nothing with regards to stopping criminal
activity is a misleading statement.
Crime is mostly the result of poverty, not guns or lack thereof.
Does regulating firearms prevent crime? Well, no.
It does seem to have an impact on gun crimes and homicide.
>"Amnesty for long guns, you mean the amnesty where the provincial
>police in 5 territories have refused to enforce/operate the
>registration system for long guns because it's just too much
> headache for no effective result?"
Again, that's misleading. There are only 3 provinces/territories
with their own police force. That's Ontario, Quebec and
Newfoundland. The rest is under the umbrella of the mounties. So
what we're talking about is a decision by the RCMP.
And the RCMP's actions were not a decision based on lack of
enforceability or results. Harper declared the amnesty, their
job is to go along with it.
Is it difficult to enforce registration of long guns? Depends.
It is in some areas, like the northwest territories. Does it
have much of an impact on street crime? Probably not. Again,
we're generally talking about more rural areas.
I don't think this invalidates firearms registration in any way.
Hindsight is 20/20, as they say. That's why we have mechanisms
in place to change legislation. I don't really see the point of
scraping the entire act because part of it should perhaps be
revised. Throwing out the baby with the bathwater, isn't it?
>"$2 Billion is not an obscene amount of money for a complete
>waste of time?"
Again, that's emotional and manipulative language. Sure, 2 billion
is obscene for a complete waste of time. But there's nothing to say
that firearms registration is a complete waste of time.