Posted on 03/11/2006 6:17:17 AM PST by Clive
EDITORIAL: Gun registry is a national disgrace
While guns have their usefulness, we believe the pen is mightier. And it's certainly mightier than the gun registry. As evidence, we note two fine columns published yesterday -- one in the Sun, and one by one of our competitors -- that once again shot the rightly discredited registry full of holes.
Our own Mark Bonokoski, who has diligently covered a disturbing number of recent stories involving legitimate gun owners having their legally stored weapons stolen, offered a devastating argument that the nearly $2-billion registry itself could actually be contributing to these crimes.
Citing numerous examples of breaches of the federal government's other (supposedly) secure databases -- the RCMP-administered CPIC system; even top secret defence department security computers -- Bono argued that the bungle-plagued gun registry is just as vulnerable.
Proving the point, he quoted former firearms registry webmaster John Hicks, who says he reported flaws in the system to his superiors: "It took some $15 million to develop it, and I broke into it in about 30 minutes," said Hicks. "A 16-year-old kid could have broken into that system in a heartbeat."
Sophisticated computer hacking aside, Bono has also reported how would-be thieves can track gun owners through ammunition sales records kept by retail stores, or other means. But most registry proponents prefer to ignore these troubles and blame the victim -- gun owners who've been burgled -- while demanding laws to ban all innocent people from owning guns.
Meanwhile, over at the National Post, columnist Lorne Gunter ripped apart a recent Star editorial (you can see why we like the guy) that insisted dismantling the unconscionably expensive gun registry -- which Stephen Harper's Conservatives were elected to do -- would be a "national tragedy."
Gunter skewered claims that the registry is oh-so-useful because police computers check it thousands of times a week -- explaining that such checks are built into the system. The fact remains, all the registry can do is tell police if someone is, or isn't, a legally registered gun owner. It can't tell them if a suspect has an illegal gun, and it has done absolutely nothing to stop them flooding our streets.
Even the most adamant gun-haters among us should recognize that that is the national tragedy. The sooner the registry is scrapped, the better.
-
When will they ever learn...when will they ever learn?
Actually, it might be 3 billion- or worse...
| Gun Registry Approaching 3B Tax Dollars AG Report |
You mean that the gun registry has not reduced violent crime?
Well, I stopped here, letters to Hitler would not have worked.
They will never learn, they will have to be forced. To a mindless, clueless, incompetent bureaucrat, the fact that the registry is a monumental failure is irrelevant. It's that feeling, that need, of being able to control the little people that matters.
You mean big-government totalitarianism begets more big-government totalitarianism?
WHODATHINKIT?
</sarc>
Good post. This should be required reading for all gun-control proponents.
Is this Canadian dollars or real money?? ;)
Gun registry is a disgrace because it shows the ignorance and tolerance of a society toward the tyrannical socialists in our governemnts, that, by virtue of their agendas, want to deliberately disarm the law-abiding American public. These anti-Constitutional hopefuls see this as just another tool toward wholesale disarmament of a society now able to protect itself against government tyranny.
As soon as they figure out that all the flowers really haven't gone anywhere...;-)
$2 billion is real money even if it were pesos.
Any chance of getting reasonable hand gun laws?
This story is about Canada, in case you missed that point. They have about zero infuence on "deliberately disarm[ing] the law-abiding American public."
And, if you think a few red necks with .30/.30 deer rifles, or even those who tote AR's and FAL's and the like are gonna stop a potential tyrannical government that has a full fledged military with M1A1 Tanks, Apache gunships, and APC's - you are delusional. The 2nd ammendment worked well when the people (militia) were armed as well, or nearly as well, as soldiers. It still poses a threat, but minor at best. The real questions is will those in the military be able to raise up arms against their fellow countrymen, their relatives, their neighbors. History teaches us that the answer is yes. 140 years ago, a new Republican president asked the nation to do just that, and they did.
What, pray tell, is reasonable?
This story is about Canada, in case you missed that point.
----
No, didn't miss that point. But the parallels to our same issue are there. There is alot of the point you miss -- "a few rednecks"...hardly. The government of this country cannot exist without public support. If even a small but significant portion of this country stood up and told the government "the second amendment will stay" -- it would.
The people grossly underestimate they control over their government due to complacency, ignorance and disinterest. That can, and probably will change in the decades to come.
Heck, only about 30% of the public designed and conducted the American Revolution -- and it worked -- :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.