In 1 minute, california gun owners go from Law abiding citizens to felons, without firing a shot...

[Aba Incieni]

You specifically used murder as an example

So just so we are clear here you don't care if people get murdered unless it's with a gun right?

The fact is 99.999% of people who legally own firearms will never kill anyone so you want all those people to register their guns even though virtually none of them will be used in a murder

Gun control is not and has never been about reducing crime

And a baseball bat is a club the club has been a weapon far longer than guns have even been around.

I dont care what I used as an example. I asked you how would the cops be able to trace the gun back to you in the event you tossed it into the river?

Who cares?

I for one don't toss my guns into rivers.

The registration of guns has nothing to do with crime prevention.

Cops/detectives do for starters.

I didnt ask what you did with your gun. I asked you how would the cops trace it back to you.

Irrelevant. Its a hypothetical situation.

This is the second time I have had to correct you. I never said gun registration had anything to do with crime prevention.

There would never be a need to trace any of my guns back to me.

Wow you really like to move the goal posts around

you asked me how would the cops find a murderer if he threw his gun in the river

If you weren't concerned about crime why use the murder example?

Why does the government need to trace any gun back to an owner ?

Perhaps it would be more beneficial to law enforcement to be able to determine if a gun that was used in a crime was NOT registered. That, in turn could lead to tracing out how illegal firearms are reaching the public.

In every riot the gun stores get cleaned out faster than the liquor stores.

Also, let's say someone stole a gun and killed somebody with it. He knows the shell casings will trace the gun (if found in his possession) back to him, so he sells it to a guy who does the same thing.

 

[Richard-H]

I dont care what I used as an example. I asked you how would the cops be able to trace the gun back to you in the event you tossed it into the river?

Who cares?

I for one don't toss my guns into rivers.

The registration of guns has nothing to do with crime prevention.

Cops/detectives do for starters.

I didnt ask what you did with your gun. I asked you how would the cops trace it back to you.

Irrelevant. Its a hypothetical situation.

This is the second time I have had to correct you. I never said gun registration had anything to do with crime prevention.

There would never be a need to trace any of my guns back to me.

Wow you really like to move the goal posts around

you asked me how would the cops find a murderer if he threw his gun in the river

If you weren't concerned about crime why use the murder example?

Why does the government need to trace any gun back to an owner ?

Perhaps it would be more beneficial to law enforcement to be able to determine if a gun that was used in a crime was NOT registered. That, in turn could lead to tracing out how illegal firearms are reaching the public.

In every riot the gun stores get cleaned out faster than the liquor stores.

Also, let's say someone stole a gun and killed somebody with it. He knows the shell casings will trace the gun (if found in his possession) back to him, so he sells it to a guy who does the same thing.

Then whenever the gun is found by law enforcement, the guy that owns it will be charged with every crime committed with the gun...unless he starts telling who he got it from and when he got it, then that guy gets charged with every crime committed with the gun...unless he starts telling who he got it from and when he got it, then that guy gets charged with every crime committed with the gun...unless he starts telling who he got it from and when he got it, then that guy gets charged with every crime committed with the gun...unless he starts telling who he got it from and when he got it, then that guy gets charged with every crime committed with the gun...

Until it's traced to the guy who originally stole it from a lawful gun owner.

 

[Asclepias]

I dont care what I used as an example. I asked you how would the cops be able to trace the gun back to you in the event you tossed it into the river?

Who cares?

I for one don't toss my guns into rivers.

The registration of guns has nothing to do with crime prevention.

Cops/detectives do for starters.

I didnt ask what you did with your gun. I asked you how would the cops trace it back to you.

Irrelevant. Its a hypothetical situation.

This is the second time I have had to correct you. I never said gun registration had anything to do with crime prevention.

There would never be a need to trace any of my guns back to me.

Wow you really like to move the goal posts around

you asked me how would the cops find a murderer if he threw his gun in the river

If you weren't concerned about crime why use the murder example?

Why does the government need to trace any gun back to an owner ?

Perhaps it would be more beneficial to law enforcement to be able to determine if a gun that was used in a crime was NOT registered. That, in turn could lead to tracing out how illegal firearms are reaching the public.

In every riot the gun stores get cleaned out faster than the liquor stores.

Also, let's say someone stole a gun and killed somebody with it. He knows the shell casings will trace the gun (if found in his possession) back to him, so he sells it to a guy who does the same thing.

Do you think the last guy that gets caught with the gun wont say where he got the gun from to avoid going to prison?

 

[Uncensored2008]

crazy Cali can do whatever they want, they are the land of pussies After all...

California has more real men than any other place in the USA.[/QUOTE]

You're not one of them, pajama boi.[/QUOTE]
Would you really like to find out in person? No ring just fist to fist.[/QUOTE]


Ohh, a bona fide internet tough guy?

 

[Skull Pilot]

There would never be a need to trace any of my guns back to me.

Wow you really like to move the goal posts around

you asked me how would the cops find a murderer if he threw his gun in the river

If you weren't concerned about crime why use the murder example?

Why does the government need to trace any gun back to an owner ?

There would be if you shot someone and tossed it in a river.

Nope. The question has remained the same. To summarize ..... How would they track down who the gun owner was?

Even if that were true the question remains the same you are the murderer and the gun owner.

Because I wanted to. Can you answer the question?

I just told you.

So we are back to crimes.

I thought you said registration wasn't about crime.

There is no need for the government to know who owns a gun just like there is no need for the government to know who owns a club, a knife, a brick, a 2x4 or anything else that can be used to commit murder

We never left crimes.

Thats correct. Its about having the ability to trace the gun to an owner.

Yes there is a reason for the government to know who owns a gun. I just told you why.

So you tell me you never said gun registration was about reducing crime now it's all about crime

If there is a need for the governemnt to know who owns guns because of crime then it is just as necessary for the governemnt to know who owns knives, clubs, or anything else that can be used to kill

We don't have gun registration now and yet cops still find murderers.

Correct. Gun registration has jack shit to do with reducing crime. Its simply a means of locating who owns the weapon.

Thats called faulty logic. Just because they want to keep track of the most efficient killing tool doesnt mean we have to be silly and track dumb shit like baseball bats or paper clips.

Not true. We do have gun registration and its pretty good at finding the owners.

There is no need for the government to know if anyone owns a weapon.

None.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You specifically used murder as an example

So just so we are clear here you don't care if people get murdered unless it's with a gun right?

The fact is 99.999% of people who legally own firearms will never kill anyone so you want all those people to register their guns even though virtually none of them will be used in a murder

Gun control is not and has never been about reducing crime

And a baseball bat is a club the club has been a weapon far longer than guns have even been around.

I dont care what I used as an example. I asked you how would the cops be able to trace the gun back to you in the event you tossed it into the river?

Who cares?

I for one don't toss my guns into rivers.

The registration of guns has nothing to do with crime prevention.

Cops/detectives do for starters.

I didnt ask what you did with your gun. I asked you how would the cops trace it back to you.

Irrelevant. Its a hypothetical situation.

This is the second time I have had to correct you. I never said gun registration had anything to do with crime prevention.

There would never be a need to trace any of my guns back to me.

Wow you really like to move the goal posts around

you asked me how would the cops find a murderer if he threw his gun in the river

If you weren't concerned about crime why use the murder example?

Why does the government need to trace any gun back to an owner ?

Perhaps it would be more beneficial to law enforcement to be able to determine if a gun that was used in a crime was NOT registered. That, in turn could lead to tracing out how illegal firearms are reaching the public.

Cops already know how criminals get their guns

There is no need for the government to know what anyone owns.

 

[mudwhistle]

California wants to confiscate guns..... first, they have to get the citizens to register those guns .... which is what the new law does in California...if you do not register your Semi automatic rifle for later confiscation by midnight, you go from law abiding citizen at 11:59 to felon at 12:00 a.m. without ever using your gun to shoot anyone or to commit any crime....

Meanwhile.... the criminals in California continue to use their illegal guns for rape, robbery and murder...

BREAKING: California "Assault Weapons" Registration Site Crashing As Midnight Deadline Nears - The Truth About Guns

f firearms are not registered before the deadline, gun owners could be charged with a felony and receive up to eight years in prison.

Democraps don't want to take our guns.
Never.
No way.

Trust them.

Just like when they said they would never provide health care and welfare for illegals.

 

[Asclepias]

There would be if you shot someone and tossed it in a river.

Nope. The question has remained the same. To summarize ..... How would they track down who the gun owner was?

Even if that were true the question remains the same you are the murderer and the gun owner.

Because I wanted to. Can you answer the question?

I just told you.

So we are back to crimes.

I thought you said registration wasn't about crime.

There is no need for the government to know who owns a gun just like there is no need for the government to know who owns a club, a knife, a brick, a 2x4 or anything else that can be used to commit murder

We never left crimes.

Thats correct. Its about having the ability to trace the gun to an owner.

Yes there is a reason for the government to know who owns a gun. I just told you why.

So you tell me you never said gun registration was about reducing crime now it's all about crime

If there is a need for the governemnt to know who owns guns because of crime then it is just as necessary for the governemnt to know who owns knives, clubs, or anything else that can be used to kill

We don't have gun registration now and yet cops still find murderers.

Correct. Gun registration has jack shit to do with reducing crime. Its simply a means of locating who owns the weapon.

Thats called faulty logic. Just because they want to keep track of the most efficient killing tool doesnt mean we have to be silly and track dumb shit like baseball bats or paper clips.

Not true. We do have gun registration and its pretty good at finding the owners.

There is no need for the government to know if anyone owns a weapon.

None.

I disagree and obviously so do many others.

 

[PredFan]

I’ll never ever register my guns. I’ll never ever turn them in. I will leave them to my kids when I die and fuck the government.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

When were they told to register the assault weapons? Yesterday? Usually you know at least by the 1rst of the year.

What law says they are going to later be confiscated?

Semi-automatic firearms are not "assault weapons"

 

[Asclepias]

When were they told to register the assault weapons? Yesterday? Usually you know at least by the 1rst of the year.

What law says they are going to later be confiscated?

Semi-automatic firearms are not "assault weapons"

You may want to tell California law makers you changed the definition. They say otherwise.


Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is considered an assault weapon under California law?
   
   There are three categories of assault weapons under California law:
   • Category One: Firearms specified on the original Roberti-Roos assault weapons list. (Pen. Code, § 30510, subds. (a),(b), and (c).)
   • Category Two: Firearms specified on the AK and AR-15 series weapons, pdf. (Pen. Code, § 30510, subds. (e) and (f).)
   • Category Three: Firearms defined as assault weapons based on specific generic characteristics, often called “SB 23 assault weapons.” (Pen. Code, § 30515.)
   
   
   
2. What are AK and AR-15 series weapons?
   
   These assault weapons are listed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in the California Code of Regulations, title 11, section 5499.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

When were they told to register the assault weapons? Yesterday? Usually you know at least by the 1rst of the year.

What law says they are going to later be confiscated?

Semi-automatic firearms are not "assault weapons"

You may want to tell California law makers you changed the definition. They say otherwise.


Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is considered an assault weapon under California law?
   
   There are three categories of assault weapons under California law:
   • Category One: Firearms specified on the original Roberti-Roos assault weapons list. (Pen. Code, § 30510, subds. (a),(b), and (c).)
   • Category Two: Firearms specified on the AK and AR-15 series weapons, pdf. (Pen. Code, § 30510, subds. (e) and (f).)
   • Category Three: Firearms defined as assault weapons based on specific generic characteristics, often called “SB 23 assault weapons.” (Pen. Code, § 30515.)
   
   
   
2. What are AK and AR-15 series weapons?
   
   These assault weapons are listed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in the California Code of Regulations, title 11, section 5499.

I've owned firearms for over 40 years and served in the Army. I've fired everything from black powder muzzle loaders to heavy machine guns. I can not go down to my local gunshop and purchase anything that functions the same as the weapons I fired in the military. They are singling out rifles for what they look like not how they operate

 

[Asclepias]

When were they told to register the assault weapons? Yesterday? Usually you know at least by the 1rst of the year.

What law says they are going to later be confiscated?

Semi-automatic firearms are not "assault weapons"

You may want to tell California law makers you changed the definition. They say otherwise.


Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is considered an assault weapon under California law?
   
   There are three categories of assault weapons under California law:
   • Category One: Firearms specified on the original Roberti-Roos assault weapons list. (Pen. Code, § 30510, subds. (a),(b), and (c).)
   • Category Two: Firearms specified on the AK and AR-15 series weapons, pdf. (Pen. Code, § 30510, subds. (e) and (f).)
   • Category Three: Firearms defined as assault weapons based on specific generic characteristics, often called “SB 23 assault weapons.” (Pen. Code, § 30515.)
   
   
   
2. What are AK and AR-15 series weapons?
   
   These assault weapons are listed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in the California Code of Regulations, title 11, section 5499.

I've owned firearms for over 40 years and served in the Army. I've fired everything from black powder muzzle loaders to heavy machine guns. I can not go down to my local gunshop and purchase anything that functions the same as the weapons I fired in the military. They are singling out rifles for what they look like not how they operate

Thats all somewhat interesting but it has nothing to do with the point that there are semi automatic weapons which are classified as assault weapons in contradiction to your claim.

 

[2aguy]

Then why not register every other weapon that can be used to commit murder?

I mean if you beat someone to death with a baseball bat and throw it in the river how are the cops going to know it's yours?

Registering guns has nothing to do with the murder rate

I didnt say registering guns has anything to do with the murder rate. I said how would they locate the owner of the gun used in the crime? A baseball bat was not created to shoot people. it was created to play baseball with. Requiring that people to register an instrument created specifically to do harm to a living entity doesnt mean other tools that could possibly be used to harm someone should be registered. This is not an all or nothing deal. It would be incredibly stupid to have people register say a fork or a rock or as you specified a baseball bat. You think government is large now. What do you think would happen if they took your suggestion to register bats?

You specifically used murder as an example

So just so we are clear here you don't care if people get murdered unless it's with a gun right?

The fact is 99.999% of people who legally own firearms will never kill anyone so you want all those people to register their guns even though virtually none of them will be used in a murder

Gun control is not and has never been about reducing crime

And a baseball bat is a club the club has been a weapon far longer than guns have even been around.

I dont care what I used as an example. I asked you how would the cops be able to trace the gun back to you in the event you tossed it into the river?

Who cares?

I for one don't toss my guns into rivers.

The registration of guns has nothing to do with crime prevention.

Cops/detectives do for starters.

I didnt ask what you did with your gun. I asked you how would the cops trace it back to you.

Irrelevant. Its a hypothetical situation.

This is the second time I have had to correct you. I never said gun registration had anything to do with crime prevention.

Cops don't need gun registration since the criminal doing the shooting is rarely the actual owner of the gun, in fact, the average time on the street of a gun is about 11 years.....so tell us how registering a gun means anything...

As my link explained, they will go for "known aquaintences" to find out who shot who...

The only reason to register guns is to confiscate them....

 

[2aguy]

I don't pretend to know the future

There is no other reason for the government to want to know if a law abiding citizen owns a gun

Are you sure about that? So if I shoot someone and throw the gun in the river, how will they know its mine if its not registered to me?

Then why not register every other weapon that can be used to commit murder?

I mean if you beat someone to death with a baseball bat and throw it in the river how are the cops going to know it's yours?

Registering guns has nothing to do with the murder rate

I didnt say registering guns has anything to do with the murder rate. I said how would they locate the owner of the gun used in the crime? A baseball bat was not created to shoot people. it was created to play baseball with. Requiring that people to register an instrument created specifically to do harm to a living entity doesnt mean other tools that could possibly be used to harm someone should be registered. This is not an all or nothing deal. It would be incredibly stupid to have people register say a fork or a rock or as you specified a baseball bat. You think government is large now. What do you think would happen if they took your suggestion to register bats?

You specifically used murder as an example

So just so we are clear here you don't care if people get murdered unless it's with a gun right?

The fact is 99.999% of people who legally own firearms will never kill anyone so you want all those people to register their guns even though virtually none of them will be used in a murder

Gun control is not and has never been about reducing crime

And a baseball bat is a club the club has been a weapon far longer than guns have even been around.

I dont care what I used as an example. I asked you how would the cops be able to trace the gun back to you in the event you tossed it into the river?

Since the shooter is rarely the actual owner, since the gun was bought through a straw purchase, sold or traded for drugs over and over again, or given out to the gang member shooters......registration doesn't do anyting...

You guys love Canada....they registered guns....and it did nothing for them...


Ten Myths Of The Long Gun Registry | Canadian Shooting Sports Association


Myth #4: Police investigations are aided by the registry.
Doubtful. Information contained in the registry is incomplete and unreliable. Due to the inaccuracy of the information, it cannot be used as evidence in court and the government has yet to prove that it has been a contributing factor in any investigation. Another factor is the dismal compliance rate (estimated at only 50%) for licensing and registration which further renders the registry useless.

Some senior police officers have stated as such: “The law registering firearms has neither deterred these crimes nor helped us solve any of them. None of the guns we know to have been used were registered ... the money could be more effectively used for security against terrorism as well as a host of other public safety initiatives.” Former Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino, January 2003.

 

[Asclepias]

I didnt say registering guns has anything to do with the murder rate. I said how would they locate the owner of the gun used in the crime? A baseball bat was not created to shoot people. it was created to play baseball with. Requiring that people to register an instrument created specifically to do harm to a living entity doesnt mean other tools that could possibly be used to harm someone should be registered. This is not an all or nothing deal. It would be incredibly stupid to have people register say a fork or a rock or as you specified a baseball bat. You think government is large now. What do you think would happen if they took your suggestion to register bats?

You specifically used murder as an example

So just so we are clear here you don't care if people get murdered unless it's with a gun right?

The fact is 99.999% of people who legally own firearms will never kill anyone so you want all those people to register their guns even though virtually none of them will be used in a murder

Gun control is not and has never been about reducing crime

And a baseball bat is a club the club has been a weapon far longer than guns have even been around.

I dont care what I used as an example. I asked you how would the cops be able to trace the gun back to you in the event you tossed it into the river?

Who cares?

I for one don't toss my guns into rivers.

The registration of guns has nothing to do with crime prevention.

Cops/detectives do for starters.

I didnt ask what you did with your gun. I asked you how would the cops trace it back to you.

Irrelevant. Its a hypothetical situation.

This is the second time I have had to correct you. I never said gun registration had anything to do with crime prevention.

Cops don't need gun registration since the criminal doing the shooting is rarely the actual owner of the gun, in fact, the average time on the street of a gun is about 11 years.....so tell us how registering a gun means anything...

As my link explained, they will go for "known aquaintences" to find out who shot who...

The only reason to register guns is to confiscate them....

I dont need a car either but it sure comes in handy when I decide to the grocery story. Just another tool to help me do it more efficiently.

If they know who the gun was registered to it helps them understand how the gun got on the street.

 

[2aguy]

When were they told to register the assault weapons? Yesterday? Usually you know at least by the 1rst of the year.

What law says they are going to later be confiscated?

Semi-automatic firearms are not "assault weapons"

You may want to tell California law makers you changed the definition. They say otherwise.


Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is considered an assault weapon under California law?
   
   There are three categories of assault weapons under California law:
   • Category One: Firearms specified on the original Roberti-Roos assault weapons list. (Pen. Code, § 30510, subds. (a),(b), and (c).)
   • Category Two: Firearms specified on the AK and AR-15 series weapons, pdf. (Pen. Code, § 30510, subds. (e) and (f).)
   • Category Three: Firearms defined as assault weapons based on specific generic characteristics, often called “SB 23 assault weapons.” (Pen. Code, § 30515.)
   
   
   
2. What are AK and AR-15 series weapons?
   
   These assault weapons are listed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in the California Code of Regulations, title 11, section 5499.

I've owned firearms for over 40 years and served in the Army. I've fired everything from black powder muzzle loaders to heavy machine guns. I can not go down to my local gunshop and purchase anything that functions the same as the weapons I fired in the military. They are singling out rifles for what they look like not how they operate

Thats all somewhat interesting but it has nothing to do with the point that there are semi automatic weapons which are classified as assault weapons in contradiction to your claim.

No.... there are lies told about guns the anti gunners think they have the emotional power to get banned...... an AR-15 is a semi automatic weapon, it is not used by the military and has never been used in war.....in fact, it is specifically protected under the 2nd Amendment as a type of rifle that is in common use for lawful purposes...

 

[miketx]

You specifically used murder as an example

So just so we are clear here you don't care if people get murdered unless it's with a gun right?

The fact is 99.999% of people who legally own firearms will never kill anyone so you want all those people to register their guns even though virtually none of them will be used in a murder

Gun control is not and has never been about reducing crime

And a baseball bat is a club the club has been a weapon far longer than guns have even been around.

I dont care what I used as an example. I asked you how would the cops be able to trace the gun back to you in the event you tossed it into the river?

Who cares?

I for one don't toss my guns into rivers.

The registration of guns has nothing to do with crime prevention.

Cops/detectives do for starters.

I didnt ask what you did with your gun. I asked you how would the cops trace it back to you.

Irrelevant. Its a hypothetical situation.

This is the second time I have had to correct you. I never said gun registration had anything to do with crime prevention.

Cops don't need gun registration since the criminal doing the shooting is rarely the actual owner of the gun, in fact, the average time on the street of a gun is about 11 years.....so tell us how registering a gun means anything...

As my link explained, they will go for "known aquaintences" to find out who shot who...

The only reason to register guns is to confiscate them....

I dont need a car either but it sure comes in handy when I decide to the grocery story. Just another tool to help me do it more efficiently.

If they know who the gun was registered to it helps them understand how the gun got on the street.

Mainly, it's going to help confiscate them.

 

[2aguy]

You specifically used murder as an example

So just so we are clear here you don't care if people get murdered unless it's with a gun right?

The fact is 99.999% of people who legally own firearms will never kill anyone so you want all those people to register their guns even though virtually none of them will be used in a murder

Gun control is not and has never been about reducing crime

And a baseball bat is a club the club has been a weapon far longer than guns have even been around.

I dont care what I used as an example. I asked you how would the cops be able to trace the gun back to you in the event you tossed it into the river?

Who cares?

I for one don't toss my guns into rivers.

The registration of guns has nothing to do with crime prevention.

Cops/detectives do for starters.

I didnt ask what you did with your gun. I asked you how would the cops trace it back to you.

Irrelevant. Its a hypothetical situation.

This is the second time I have had to correct you. I never said gun registration had anything to do with crime prevention.

Cops don't need gun registration since the criminal doing the shooting is rarely the actual owner of the gun, in fact, the average time on the street of a gun is about 11 years.....so tell us how registering a gun means anything...

As my link explained, they will go for "known aquaintences" to find out who shot who...

The only reason to register guns is to confiscate them....

I dont need a car either but it sure comes in handy when I decide to the grocery story. Just another tool to help me do it more efficiently.

If they know who the gun was registered to it helps them understand how the gun got on the street.

It doesn't do any of that.....but nice try...

 

[Asclepias]

Are you sure about that? So if I shoot someone and throw the gun in the river, how will they know its mine if its not registered to me?

Then why not register every other weapon that can be used to commit murder?

I mean if you beat someone to death with a baseball bat and throw it in the river how are the cops going to know it's yours?

Registering guns has nothing to do with the murder rate

I didnt say registering guns has anything to do with the murder rate. I said how would they locate the owner of the gun used in the crime? A baseball bat was not created to shoot people. it was created to play baseball with. Requiring that people to register an instrument created specifically to do harm to a living entity doesnt mean other tools that could possibly be used to harm someone should be registered. This is not an all or nothing deal. It would be incredibly stupid to have people register say a fork or a rock or as you specified a baseball bat. You think government is large now. What do you think would happen if they took your suggestion to register bats?

You specifically used murder as an example

So just so we are clear here you don't care if people get murdered unless it's with a gun right?

The fact is 99.999% of people who legally own firearms will never kill anyone so you want all those people to register their guns even though virtually none of them will be used in a murder

Gun control is not and has never been about reducing crime

And a baseball bat is a club the club has been a weapon far longer than guns have even been around.

I dont care what I used as an example. I asked you how would the cops be able to trace the gun back to you in the event you tossed it into the river?

Since the shooter is rarely the actual owner, since the gun was bought through a straw purchase, sold or traded for drugs over and over again, or given out to the gang member shooters......registration doesn't do anyting...

You guys love Canada....they registered guns....and it did nothing for them...


Ten Myths Of The Long Gun Registry | Canadian Shooting Sports Association


Myth #4: Police investigations are aided by the registry.
Doubtful. Information contained in the registry is incomplete and unreliable. Due to the inaccuracy of the information, it cannot be used as evidence in court and the government has yet to prove that it has been a contributing factor in any investigation. Another factor is the dismal compliance rate (estimated at only 50%) for licensing and registration which further renders the registry useless.

Some senior police officers have stated as such: “The law registering firearms has neither deterred these crimes nor helped us solve any of them. None of the guns we know to have been used were registered ... the money could be more effectively used for security against terrorism as well as a host of other public safety initiatives.” Former Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino, January 2003.

So your using Canada laws to prove your case in the US? You do realize their laws dont dictate what we can use in court right?