XPost: can.politics, can.rec.hunting, can.talk.guns   
   XPost: kingston.general, talk.politics.guns, van.general   
   From: klunk@theothershoe.org   
      
   "Larry"  wrote in message   
   news:%Nzyg.90793$hp.34025@read2.cgocable.net...   
   > Are you ignoring this post I sent a couple of days ago kluck?   
      
   no... why?.... are you feeling ignored?.... is this a typical feeling for   
   you?... does everyone around you ignore you?.... don't worry though, papa's   
   here to give you a resounding reality check... just keep on posting the same   
   repetitive stupidity and i'll provide you with the nudges you need to come   
   to terms with your dilemma...   
      
      
   > You made the claim of being able to prove the registry has helped fighting   
   > crime, where is that proof you have?   
      
   really....?... i said (paraphrased) the registry is an important component   
   in an overall strategy for dealing with the issue of crime in our society...   
   i suppose this can be interpreted as "helped fighting crime"... but the   
   answer you actually seek is whether or not a distinct line can be drawn from   
   the registry to the resolution of a crime.... you wish to see a direct,   
   (cause-and-effect) causal relationship drawn out in simplistic terms....   
   like a graphic pie chart, eh?... x-number of system accesses resulted in   
   x-number of homocide convictions.... or officer so-and-so accessed the   
   system on this date and as a result, criminal offender what's-his-name is   
   now behind bars, eh?..... hmmm... perhaps such is possible, but it is not a   
   claim i've ever made... although you can certainly feel free to hunt through   
   my posts and find it for everyone to know just how willing you are to   
   justify your own claims.... while proving me a liar... this would do my   
   reputation far more damage than the other idiots that have squawked this   
   accusation before...   
      
      
   > I show you proof the police are saying the registry is ineffective and   
   > hasn't aided at all investigating or solving crime, or getting criminals   
   > or illegal guns off the streets, and all you do is resort to name calling,   
   > and dispute these testimonies by saying they are from retired, incompetent   
   > cops.   
      
   actually... you provided 8 distinctly different people... one went   
   un-named... most definitely a minority... a few dissenting voices does not   
   make for proof... particularly when their own voices offer up only   
   opinion... and in fact, you've only proven that the majority of police   
   actually support it.   
      
      
   > Well, none of the following are retired, incompetent cops, but are chiefs   
   > and seasoned lawmen, who are out there every day on the front lines. And   
   > it isn't just a few, I have pages of them from all across Canada.   
      
   actually, you should contact the VPD chief... his tactless sense of humour   
   seems to indicate his to be a supportive personality in your cause... btw...   
   how about listing your "pages" of names... how about providing some sort of   
   representative survey of the police department that reflects their views on   
   this issue?... you should be able to double the amount of names you provided   
   by just cruising off-duty police pubs and eavsedropping within a couple of   
   nights worth of effort... hell, if your claims held any sort of substance,   
   all it would take is an hour and you'd be able to easily quadruple your   
   list.   
      
      
   > So, by your reactions to the proof I provide, as that of a sixth grader   
   > throwing a temper tantrum, sputtering the same old repeats "they don't   
   > count", without posting the proof you say undeniably shows this useless   
   > registry is effective, leads us to the conclusion you do not have any   
   > evidence of support for the registry.   
      
   actually... i provided rationale and YOU'VE countered with tantrums and   
   unsubstatiated claims and accusations...   
      
      
   > Instead of your childish antics, please show us evidence that supports   
   > your claim we need to sink millions more into this registry.   
      
   Instead of your childish antics, please show us evidence that i made such a   
   claim.   
      
      
      
      
   > "Larry"  wrote in message   
   > news:NWVxg.49469$Uy1.38520@read1.cgocable.net...   
   >>   
   >> "klunk"  wrote in message   
   >> news:jXjxg.234463$IK3.187624@pd7tw1no...   
   >>>   
   >>> "Larry"  wrote in message   
   >>> news:Pshxg.85390$hp.40853@read2.cgocable.net...   
   >>>>    
   >>>>>actually your guns, along with all other guns are either actually used   
   >>>>>in commiting crimes or they can potentially become crime-enabling   
   >>>>>weapons... so, by tracking all guns, we (as a society - try not to   
   >>>>>forget we're all in this together) are more capable of managing a   
   >>>>>problem that is insanely out of control....   
   >>>>   
   >>   
   >> Yes, you will be able to track my registered guns, but what about the   
   >> criminals that don't register theirs?  How is registration going to help   
   >> us? Why not put that money where it will do some good, getting criminals   
   >> and illegal guns off the street?   
   >>   
   >> > I see... you support various costly initiatives to ensure safe and   
   >> > responsible firearms use yet you think only the registry is expensive   
   >> > and does nothing to deal with the growing problem of violent crime.....   
   >> > hmmmm.... AND you claim "objectivity".....?!?!?!?   
   >>   
   >> What costly initiatives? If by that you mean the idea of putting more   
   >> police on the streets, and making sure the real criminals actually get   
   >> punished, and getting guns out of hands that shouldn't have them, that   
   >> money would come from the millions wasted on this registry, that only   
   >> tells the cops what guns law abiding citizens have.   
   >> Plus, as I've said, everyone has to renew FAC every five years; without   
   >> an FAC, a person can't own or purchase a gun, nor purchase ammunition.   
   >> Thus, when the police go on a call, with a click of a mouse they will   
   >> know if firearms are at the residence because the FAC would show up. But,   
   >> if no FAC is on file for the person, and they illegally have guns, what   
   >> benefit then is the registry? None.   
   >> So, police know ahead of time if guns are suppose to be present on a call   
   >> because of the FAC, only licensed people can purchase/own guns and ammo;   
   >> even with the registry, there is no way for the police to know for sure   
   >> if guns will be involved on any call; criminals won't register guns   
   >> anyway; and the aforementioned safeguards are already in place so there's   
   >> no additional cost.   
   >> All that money being wasted could get criminals and illegal guns off the   
   >> streets.   
   >> Should that not be our prime objective?   
   >>   
   >>>yes.... the same old crap... with no prooooooof, you say?   
   >>> hmmmmmmm..... i must be watching a different channel,   
   >>> 'cause the plotline on my soap has been the loony-toon-gun-loons   
   >>> crooning the same ol' tune... btw... when are you going to start calling   
   >>> me a liar?   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)