Gun license / registration -- a sound argument?

[M14 Shooter]

Looking for a sound argument as to why it is necessary for the state to know who has guns, how many and what kind.

Please be sure to account for the fact that the overwhelming majority of guns and gun owners are never, ever, involved in a crime; please also be sure to account for the fact that the state can neither require criminals (et al) to obtain such a license nor register their guns.

You may now proceed.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Looking for a sound argument as to why it is necessary for the state to know who has guns, how many and what kind.

It isn't. Clark County, Nevada just dumped our gun registry and blue card program because it was costing the county a million dollars a year to maintain and they never once caught a criminal with it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Looking for a sound argument as to why it is necessary for the state to know who has guns, how many and what kind.

It isn't. Clark County, Nevada just dumped our gun registry and blue card program because it was costing the county a million dollars a year to maintain and they never once caught a criminal with it.

Be interesting to see how many gun-related crimes have been solved because the perpetrator had a license and/or the gun he used was registered to him.

 

[2aguy]

Looking for a sound argument as to why it is necessary for the state to know who has guns, how many and what kind.

It isn't. Clark County, Nevada just dumped our gun registry and blue card program because it was costing the county a million dollars a year to maintain and they never once caught a criminal with it.

It was even more expensive when they did it in Canada…they dumped their registration system as well…it was eating up money, manpower and time……..to no productive end.

 

[2aguy]

I'll wager that not many take up this thread……..

 

[Brain357]

Looking for a sound argument as to why it is necessary for the state to know who has guns, how many and what kind.

It isn't. Clark County, Nevada just dumped our gun registry and blue card program because it was costing the county a million dollars a year to maintain and they never once caught a criminal with it.

It was even more expensive when they did it in Canada…they dumped their registration system as well…it was eating up money, manpower and time……..to no productive end.

You have mentioned that before. If you have any good links with the details it would be interesting for this thread.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'll wager that not many take up this thread……..

No bet.

 

[2aguy]

Looking for a sound argument as to why it is necessary for the state to know who has guns, how many and what kind.

It isn't. Clark County, Nevada just dumped our gun registry and blue card program because it was costing the county a million dollars a year to maintain and they never once caught a criminal with it.

It was even more expensive when they did it in Canada…they dumped their registration system as well…it was eating up money, manpower and time……..to no productive end.

You have mentioned that before. If you have any good links with the details it would be interesting for this thread.

Here you go….a story on Canada trying to register 15 million long guns…..

Canada Tried Registering Long Guns -- And Gave Up

Maybe they shouldn’t worry. Universal registration has been tried in several countries, most recently in Canada. The program turned out to be far more expensive than expected and didn’t have any discernable impact on crime, perhaps because long guns are used so rarely by criminals in the first place. Canada’s gun homicide rate, according to the handy statistics at Gunpolicy.org, has held steady since the late 1990s.

Canada passed a strict gun-control law in 1995, partly in reaction to a 1989 shooting at Montreal’s Ecole Polytechnique with a semiautomatic rifle. The law required universal regulation of guns, including rifles and shotguns. Proponents said the central registry would give law-enforcement agencies a powerful new tool for tracking guns used in crimes. They also claimed it would help reduce domestic violence and suicide.


Canada‘s then-Minister of Justice Allan Rock supported the law, telling Parliament:

Registration will reduce crime and better equip the police to deal with crime
in Canadian society by providing them with information they often need to
do their job … Registration will assist us to deal with the scourge of domestic
violence … Suicides and accidents provide another example … If a firearm is
not readily available, lives can be saved. If registration, as the police believe, will
encourage owners to store firearms safely so those impulsive acts are less likely,
the result may be different.

The law passed and starting in 1998 Canadians were required to have a license to own firearms and register their weapons with the government. According to Canadian researcher (and gun enthusiast)Gary Mauser, the Canada Firearms Center quickly rose to 600 employees and the cost of the effort climbed past $600 million. In 2002 Canada’s auditor general released a report saying initial cost estimates of $2 million (Canadian) had increased to $1 billion as the government tried to register the estimated 15 million guns owned by Canada’s 34 million residents.

****************

So the government was spending the bulk of its money — about $17 million of the Firearms Center’s $82 million annual budget — trying to register long guns when the statistics showed they weren’t the problem.

*********************************

Police studies in Canada estimated that 2-16% of guns used in crimes were stolen from legal owners and thus potentially in the registry. The bulk of the guns, Canadian officials concluded, were unregistered weapons imported illegally from the U.S. by criminal gangs.

But Mauser notes that gun homicides have actually been rising in recent years, from 151 in 1999 to 173 in 2009, as violent criminal gangs use guns in their drug turf wars and other disputes. As in the U.S., most gun homicides in Canada are committed by young males, many of them with criminal records. In the majority of homicides involving young males, the victim and the killer are know each other.

The bigger lesson of Canada’s experiment, Mauser says, is that gun registration rarely delivers the results proponents expect. In most countries the actual number registered settles out at about a sixth.Germany required registration during the Baader-Meinhof reign of terror in the 1970s, and recorded 3.2 million of the estimated 17 million guns in that country; England tried to register pump-action and semiautomatic shotguns in the 1980s, but only got about 50,000 of the estimated 300,000 such guns stored in homes around the country

Canada’s suicide rates don’t appear to have been affected by the gun law, either. The overall suicide rate fell by 2% between 1995 and 2009, according to Statistics Canada, but gun deaths only average about 16% of suicides and a decline in gun deaths was almost entirely made up by increases in hangings.

Some police officers also questioned the efficacy of the registry in protecting them on domestic-violence calls, since the registry was riddled with inaccuracies and didn’t say where guns are located, only who owns them. Either way, long guns are only involved in about 18% of female spousal killings in Canada. Knives account for 31%, according to Mauser.

 

[Brain357]

Looking for a sound argument as to why it is necessary for the state to know who has guns, how many and what kind.

It isn't. Clark County, Nevada just dumped our gun registry and blue card program because it was costing the county a million dollars a year to maintain and they never once caught a criminal with it.

It was even more expensive when they did it in Canada…they dumped their registration system as well…it was eating up money, manpower and time……..to no productive end.

You have mentioned that before. If you have any good links with the details it would be interesting for this thread.

Here you go….a story on Canada trying to register 15 million long guns…..

Canada Tried Registering Long Guns -- And Gave Up

Maybe they shouldn’t worry. Universal registration has been tried in several countries, most recently in Canada. The program turned out to be far more expensive than expected and didn’t have any discernable impact on crime, perhaps because long guns are used so rarely by criminals in the first place. Canada’s gun homicide rate, according to the handy statistics at Gunpolicy.org, has held steady since the late 1990s.

Canada passed a strict gun-control law in 1995, partly in reaction to a 1989 shooting at Montreal’s Ecole Polytechnique with a semiautomatic rifle. The law required universal regulation of guns, including rifles and shotguns. Proponents said the central registry would give law-enforcement agencies a powerful new tool for tracking guns used in crimes. They also claimed it would help reduce domestic violence and suicide.


Canada‘s then-Minister of Justice Allan Rock supported the law, telling Parliament:

Registration will reduce crime and better equip the police to deal with crime
in Canadian society by providing them with information they often need to
do their job … Registration will assist us to deal with the scourge of domestic
violence … Suicides and accidents provide another example … If a firearm is
not readily available, lives can be saved. If registration, as the police believe, will
encourage owners to store firearms safely so those impulsive acts are less likely,
the result may be different.

The law passed and starting in 1998 Canadians were required to have a license to own firearms and register their weapons with the government. According to Canadian researcher (and gun enthusiast)Gary Mauser, the Canada Firearms Center quickly rose to 600 employees and the cost of the effort climbed past $600 million. In 2002 Canada’s auditor general released a report saying initial cost estimates of $2 million (Canadian) had increased to $1 billion as the government tried to register the estimated 15 million guns owned by Canada’s 34 million residents.

****************

So the government was spending the bulk of its money — about $17 million of the Firearms Center’s $82 million annual budget — trying to register long guns when the statistics showed they weren’t the problem.

*********************************

Police studies in Canada estimated that 2-16% of guns used in crimes were stolen from legal owners and thus potentially in the registry. The bulk of the guns, Canadian officials concluded, were unregistered weapons imported illegally from the U.S. by criminal gangs.

But Mauser notes that gun homicides have actually been rising in recent years, from 151 in 1999 to 173 in 2009, as violent criminal gangs use guns in their drug turf wars and other disputes. As in the U.S., most gun homicides in Canada are committed by young males, many of them with criminal records. In the majority of homicides involving young males, the victim and the killer are know each other.

The bigger lesson of Canada’s experiment, Mauser says, is that gun registration rarely delivers the results proponents expect. In most countries the actual number registered settles out at about a sixth.Germany required registration during the Baader-Meinhof reign of terror in the 1970s, and recorded 3.2 million of the estimated 17 million guns in that country; England tried to register pump-action and semiautomatic shotguns in the 1980s, but only got about 50,000 of the estimated 300,000 such guns stored in homes around the country

Canada’s suicide rates don’t appear to have been affected by the gun law, either. The overall suicide rate fell by 2% between 1995 and 2009, according to Statistics Canada, but gun deaths only average about 16% of suicides and a decline in gun deaths was almost entirely made up by increases in hangings.

Some police officers also questioned the efficacy of the registry in protecting them on domestic-violence calls, since the registry was riddled with inaccuracies and didn’t say where guns are located, only who owns them. Either way, long guns are only involved in about 18% of female spousal killings in Canada. Knives account for 31%, according to Mauser.

So they abandoned the long gun registry, but continue with other guns like hand guns and machine guns?

I don't think I would bother with registering long guns.

The costs are interesting. Hard to believe it got so expensive. Must be government waste.

 

[2aguy]

Looking for a sound argument as to why it is necessary for the state to know who has guns, how many and what kind.

It isn't. Clark County, Nevada just dumped our gun registry and blue card program because it was costing the county a million dollars a year to maintain and they never once caught a criminal with it.

It was even more expensive when they did it in Canada…they dumped their registration system as well…it was eating up money, manpower and time……..to no productive end.

You have mentioned that before. If you have any good links with the details it would be interesting for this thread.

Here you go….a story on Canada trying to register 15 million long guns…..

Canada Tried Registering Long Guns -- And Gave Up

Maybe they shouldn’t worry. Universal registration has been tried in several countries, most recently in Canada. The program turned out to be far more expensive than expected and didn’t have any discernable impact on crime, perhaps because long guns are used so rarely by criminals in the first place. Canada’s gun homicide rate, according to the handy statistics at Gunpolicy.org, has held steady since the late 1990s.

Canada passed a strict gun-control law in 1995, partly in reaction to a 1989 shooting at Montreal’s Ecole Polytechnique with a semiautomatic rifle. The law required universal regulation of guns, including rifles and shotguns. Proponents said the central registry would give law-enforcement agencies a powerful new tool for tracking guns used in crimes. They also claimed it would help reduce domestic violence and suicide.


Canada‘s then-Minister of Justice Allan Rock supported the law, telling Parliament:

Registration will reduce crime and better equip the police to deal with crime
in Canadian society by providing them with information they often need to
do their job … Registration will assist us to deal with the scourge of domestic
violence … Suicides and accidents provide another example … If a firearm is
not readily available, lives can be saved. If registration, as the police believe, will
encourage owners to store firearms safely so those impulsive acts are less likely,
the result may be different.

The law passed and starting in 1998 Canadians were required to have a license to own firearms and register their weapons with the government. According to Canadian researcher (and gun enthusiast)Gary Mauser, the Canada Firearms Center quickly rose to 600 employees and the cost of the effort climbed past $600 million. In 2002 Canada’s auditor general released a report saying initial cost estimates of $2 million (Canadian) had increased to $1 billion as the government tried to register the estimated 15 million guns owned by Canada’s 34 million residents.

****************

So the government was spending the bulk of its money — about $17 million of the Firearms Center’s $82 million annual budget — trying to register long guns when the statistics showed they weren’t the problem.

*********************************

Police studies in Canada estimated that 2-16% of guns used in crimes were stolen from legal owners and thus potentially in the registry. The bulk of the guns, Canadian officials concluded, were unregistered weapons imported illegally from the U.S. by criminal gangs.

But Mauser notes that gun homicides have actually been rising in recent years, from 151 in 1999 to 173 in 2009, as violent criminal gangs use guns in their drug turf wars and other disputes. As in the U.S., most gun homicides in Canada are committed by young males, many of them with criminal records. In the majority of homicides involving young males, the victim and the killer are know each other.

The bigger lesson of Canada’s experiment, Mauser says, is that gun registration rarely delivers the results proponents expect. In most countries the actual number registered settles out at about a sixth.Germany required registration during the Baader-Meinhof reign of terror in the 1970s, and recorded 3.2 million of the estimated 17 million guns in that country; England tried to register pump-action and semiautomatic shotguns in the 1980s, but only got about 50,000 of the estimated 300,000 such guns stored in homes around the country

Canada’s suicide rates don’t appear to have been affected by the gun law, either. The overall suicide rate fell by 2% between 1995 and 2009, according to Statistics Canada, but gun deaths only average about 16% of suicides and a decline in gun deaths was almost entirely made up by increases in hangings.

Some police officers also questioned the efficacy of the registry in protecting them on domestic-violence calls, since the registry was riddled with inaccuracies and didn’t say where guns are located, only who owns them. Either way, long guns are only involved in about 18% of female spousal killings in Canada. Knives account for 31%, according to Mauser.

So they abandoned the long gun registry, but continue with other guns like hand guns and machine guns?

I don't think I would bother with registering long guns.

The costs are interesting. Hard to believe it got so expensive. Must be government waste.

Why would it be hard to believe it got so expensive...everything the government does costs more, takes more people and is inefficient than it would be if the private sector did it.

That implies that you would register hand guns....why? You don't need to register guns to arrest someone who commits a crime with a gun, or to arrest a felon if they are caught with a gun...there is no reason at all to register guns.

 

[M14 Shooter]

No takers?

 

[2aguy]

No takers?

The anti gun extremists……they are so predictable…they want to ban guns….registration and licensing are pointless and useless, but they are baby steps toward their final goal…so they don't want to actually discuss them….

 

[Brain357]

It isn't. Clark County, Nevada just dumped our gun registry and blue card program because it was costing the county a million dollars a year to maintain and they never once caught a criminal with it.

It was even more expensive when they did it in Canada…they dumped their registration system as well…it was eating up money, manpower and time……..to no productive end.

You have mentioned that before. If you have any good links with the details it would be interesting for this thread.

Here you go….a story on Canada trying to register 15 million long guns…..

Canada Tried Registering Long Guns -- And Gave Up

Maybe they shouldn’t worry. Universal registration has been tried in several countries, most recently in Canada. The program turned out to be far more expensive than expected and didn’t have any discernable impact on crime, perhaps because long guns are used so rarely by criminals in the first place. Canada’s gun homicide rate, according to the handy statistics at Gunpolicy.org, has held steady since the late 1990s.

Canada passed a strict gun-control law in 1995, partly in reaction to a 1989 shooting at Montreal’s Ecole Polytechnique with a semiautomatic rifle. The law required universal regulation of guns, including rifles and shotguns. Proponents said the central registry would give law-enforcement agencies a powerful new tool for tracking guns used in crimes. They also claimed it would help reduce domestic violence and suicide.


Canada‘s then-Minister of Justice Allan Rock supported the law, telling Parliament:

Registration will reduce crime and better equip the police to deal with crime
in Canadian society by providing them with information they often need to
do their job … Registration will assist us to deal with the scourge of domestic
violence … Suicides and accidents provide another example … If a firearm is
not readily available, lives can be saved. If registration, as the police believe, will
encourage owners to store firearms safely so those impulsive acts are less likely,
the result may be different.

The law passed and starting in 1998 Canadians were required to have a license to own firearms and register their weapons with the government. According to Canadian researcher (and gun enthusiast)Gary Mauser, the Canada Firearms Center quickly rose to 600 employees and the cost of the effort climbed past $600 million. In 2002 Canada’s auditor general released a report saying initial cost estimates of $2 million (Canadian) had increased to $1 billion as the government tried to register the estimated 15 million guns owned by Canada’s 34 million residents.

****************

So the government was spending the bulk of its money — about $17 million of the Firearms Center’s $82 million annual budget — trying to register long guns when the statistics showed they weren’t the problem.

*********************************

Police studies in Canada estimated that 2-16% of guns used in crimes were stolen from legal owners and thus potentially in the registry. The bulk of the guns, Canadian officials concluded, were unregistered weapons imported illegally from the U.S. by criminal gangs.

But Mauser notes that gun homicides have actually been rising in recent years, from 151 in 1999 to 173 in 2009, as violent criminal gangs use guns in their drug turf wars and other disputes. As in the U.S., most gun homicides in Canada are committed by young males, many of them with criminal records. In the majority of homicides involving young males, the victim and the killer are know each other.

The bigger lesson of Canada’s experiment, Mauser says, is that gun registration rarely delivers the results proponents expect. In most countries the actual number registered settles out at about a sixth.Germany required registration during the Baader-Meinhof reign of terror in the 1970s, and recorded 3.2 million of the estimated 17 million guns in that country; England tried to register pump-action and semiautomatic shotguns in the 1980s, but only got about 50,000 of the estimated 300,000 such guns stored in homes around the country

Canada’s suicide rates don’t appear to have been affected by the gun law, either. The overall suicide rate fell by 2% between 1995 and 2009, according to Statistics Canada, but gun deaths only average about 16% of suicides and a decline in gun deaths was almost entirely made up by increases in hangings.

Some police officers also questioned the efficacy of the registry in protecting them on domestic-violence calls, since the registry was riddled with inaccuracies and didn’t say where guns are located, only who owns them. Either way, long guns are only involved in about 18% of female spousal killings in Canada. Knives account for 31%, according to Mauser.

So they abandoned the long gun registry, but continue with other guns like hand guns and machine guns?

I don't think I would bother with registering long guns.

The costs are interesting. Hard to believe it got so expensive. Must be government waste.

Why would it be hard to believe it got so expensive...everything the government does costs more, takes more people and is inefficient than it would be if the private sector did it.

That implies that you would register hand guns....why? You don't need to register guns to arrest someone who commits a crime with a gun, or to arrest a felon if they are caught with a gun...there is no reason at all to register guns.

I'll put forth an argument if I get one.

Wonder how it could be put into $$$.

 

[M14 Shooter]

No one?
Licenses for gun owners and registration for firearms are two of the most favored restrictions anti-gun loons want on law-abiding citizens -- and none of them can put forth a sound argument as to why they are necessary?
Really?

 

[M14 Shooter]

[cricket]
chirp...chirp...chrip...
[/cricket]

 

[M14 Shooter]

Still no one, huh?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Astonishing that this topic has not receives even ONE sound response.
All of you who want license/registration - where are you?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Astonishing that this topic has not receives even ONE sounds response.
All of you who want license/registration - where are you?

Busy, apparently. I have no issues requiring what we do for boats and dogs.

As for why, to help track how the guns move around. Stolen ones could even be returned to the rightful owner, but it's not about control. We already know who the gun nuts are...

 

[Darkwind]

Looking for a sound argument as to why it is necessary for the state to know who has guns, how many and what kind.

It isn't. Clark County, Nevada just dumped our gun registry and blue card program because it was costing the county a million dollars a year to maintain and they never once caught a criminal with it.

Wow, that clerk gets paid a pretty hefty salary..

 

[skookerasbil]

zero chance of this happening..........

They tried something similar in NY and Ct back in early 2013 after Sandy Hook.....banned "assault weapons" and required owners to register them. In both states, only 3% did. Laughable.