XPost: can.politics, can.talk.guns, kingston.general   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns, van.general   
   From: TopPoster@poster.   
      
   In article <58Awg.47066$Uy1.11405@read1.cgocable.net>, kiwi@NOSPAMcogeco.ca   
   says...   
   >   
   >hey kluck, blah blah blah! I showed you the very people you tree huggers   
   >have been harping are the ones that should know whether the registry works   
   >and support it, the Chiefs and police, when in fact do not support the   
   >registry, and all you can do is spew out, from your single celled Darwinism   
   >brain, psycho babble with a Freudian truism, citing you were in fact not   
   >talking about these particular chiefs, police or CACPs', but the 2 or 3 that   
   >won't fess up they in fact have changed their mind, because they would   
   >rather play the game than say they erred.   
      
   I'm just thanking my lucky stars this guy has no access to guns..   
      
   >If you think it is only a few rebel cops that have just jumped ship on this,   
   >you sir, are sorely mistaken. I have hundreds of statements here like the   
   >ones I posted, of police all across this country that are out there every   
   >day putting their lives on the line to protect mindless freaks like you,   
   >that are saying registration doesn't work. That the millions being flushed   
   >down the toilet senselessly to track the guns of law abiding citizens would   
   >be better spent, and we would be much safer, getting criminals off the   
   >streets. I will gladly email them to you if you wish. I wouldn't post them   
   >here because it's days of reading there's so many. Also, every police   
   >officer I talked to locally said the registry hasn't helped them at all, not   
   >once.   
   >So, post the proof you claim shows the registry works, then slither back   
   >into your primordial ooze where you belong with the other worthless armchair   
   >airheads who are more interested in legislation and noise than actually   
   >dealing with the problem.   
   >I, sir, am not your problem, it's that guy around the corner from you that   
   >wouldn't register his weapons because he's not interested in abiding by the   
   >laws, who you should be looking out for.   
   >Also, if you think for one instant I'm not interested in stopping gun   
   >violence because I don't support the registry, or I don't have a stake in   
   >wanting to be safe on the street, I have a lot bigger stake than you ever   
   >will, sir. I still have bullet fragments in both my legs from a repeat   
   >offender that spent a few days in jail and paid a little fines his first gun   
   >offences.   
   >FYI, he did not have nor ever had an FAC, and he laughed as he said he could   
   >get a gun whenever he wanted. Oh, he got 7 years for shooting me, was out in   
   >4! You think the registry means anything to this lowlife?   
   >So, the next time you hear of someone getting shot, praying they live, ask   
   >them which makes more sense to them? Spending money on a registry that only   
   >tells police what guns I have, because they already know I have some with a   
   >simple click of the mouse because I have an FAC, or more resources to combat   
   >and punish criminals? Call me crazy, I vote for the resources, that fucking   
   >whiteman, and all others like him, should never be allowed to walk the   
   >streets again. I say, we should have "do unto others as they have done unto   
   >you" justice.   
   >I would gladly give the asshole a 300 yard start! With my 7mm rem mag, on a   
   >bad day, I get less than 2inch groups at 500yards.   
   >Sorry guys, I know, that doesn't help our cause, but it felt good for a   
   >moment...I sometimes have to take a moment now and then????!!!!   
   >Larry   
   >"klunk"  wrote in message   
   >news:0wtwg.217075$iF6.107721@pd7tw2no...   
   >>   
   >> "0:->"  wrote in message   
   >> news:E_2dnQqwo7Mf_F_ZnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@scnresearch.com...   
   >>> Larry wrote:   
   >>>> Well, this is interesting. Remember all that whoopla about the police   
   >>>> chiefs and CACPs' supposedly in staunch support of the registry, that   
   >>>> aint xactly true! Here is a little tidbit, which took me hours of   
   >>>> reading to find, that sure wasn't suppose to be discovered. Seems   
   >>>> they've been into some mind changin', but we sure weren't suppose to,   
   >>>> and the Libs' didn't want us, ta find out!   
   >>>> So, you armchair do-gooders, here's my proof, from da horses mouth so to   
   >>>> speak, that this registry has absolutely no positive effect in keeping   
   >>>> YOU safe from guns.   
   >>>> Now, where is your proof it does?????   
   >>>>   
   >>>> "POLICE SAY: GUN REGISTRY IS "DEEPLY, AND POSSIBLY, FATALLY FLAWED"   
   >>>> Police Association letter: "To think criminals will be affected by   
   >>>> this legislation is asinine."   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Ottawa - Today, Garry Breitkreuz, Official Opposition Firearms Critic   
   >>>> and MP for Yorkton-Melville, made public a copy of leaked letter that   
   >>>> adds credence to his claims that the police associations are getting   
   >>>> ready to withdraw their "official" support from the Liberal's useless   
   >>>> $400 million gun registry. "We always knew that the vast majority of   
   >>>> police on the street opposed the gun registration scheme, now we have   
   >>>> proof that the executive who represent these rank-and-file officers   
   >>>> are finally starting to get the message."   
   >>>> Breitkreuz released a copy of a letter from the Ontario Senior   
   >>>> Officers' Police Association to Solicitor General Lawrence MacAuley   
   >>>> dated Friday, January 21, 2000. The 8-page letter provides even more   
   >>>> evidence that the gun registry is in serious trouble and corroborates   
   >>>> reports given to Justice Minister Anne McLellan by her own User Group   
   >>>> on Firearms. The letter states, "There is little doubt that the   
   >>>> legislation is deeply, and possibly fatally flawed. There was ample   
   >>>> time to research and prepare appropriately for a feasible and workable   
   >>>> act - this was not done, in our view."   
   >>>> Here are a few more quotable quotes from the police association letter   
   >>>> to the Liberal government:   
   >>>> ·      This.has produced bitterness, acrimony, divisive bickering.and an   
   >>>> act which, to be kind, is ineffective .   
   >>>> ·      It has created a bureaucratic quagmire and its deterrent effect   
   >>>> is   
   >>>> questionable, at best.   
   >>>> ·      A glance at Bill C68 is all that is required to realize that a   
   >>>> law   
   >>>> degree is required to understand and use it.   
   >>>> ·      Several thousand FIP hits.because they have been extracted   
   >>>> several   
   >>>> times for the same incident.   
   >>>> ·      The original matter has to be re-investigated. Surely, this is   
   >>>> not   
   >>>> how the system was designed to work.   
   >>>> ·      Transfers now take up to three days to complete. The sale or   
   >>>> purchase of a house can take less time.   
   >>>> ·      Firearms businesses are closing because of the.legislation as it   
   >>>> is   
   >>>> presently constituted. This is outrageous.   
   >>>> ·      The program still lacks the proper modules for Firearms Officers.   
   >>>> ·      It does not store information, and never will, back to the CFRS   
   >>>> system, which was supposed to be the case.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)