spinnerbaitking Posted April 9, 2009 Report Share Posted April 9, 2009 People might be interested in this, I've already signed it 9031 signatures so far Richard http://www.scrapthelonggunregistry.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roy Posted April 9, 2009 Report Share Posted April 9, 2009 Done and thanks for posting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinbanger Posted April 9, 2009 Report Share Posted April 9, 2009 Done ..9100 and counting ! TB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTHM Posted April 9, 2009 Report Share Posted April 9, 2009 9120 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRIFTER_016 Posted April 9, 2009 Report Share Posted April 9, 2009 I filled er in a couple of days ago and there were only just over 600 signatures then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spinnerbaitking Posted April 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 10, 2009 Just keeping it active 12,654 Signatures Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jace Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 This whole thing has become such a farce and there have been so many changes in deadlines and requirements that I no longer care where it stands. I'd like to see it go away but if it's like the last time they considered it, the database of gun owners will still be kept and used as intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnAB Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Signed it just now. Should never came into being to begin with. A total knee jerk reaction to a tragedy but common sense should have prevailed back then. Hopefully it prevails now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tschirk Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Sorry to go against the grain but as bad as this program is if it even saves one life (e.g. stolen gun recovered), I believe in a registry. I know bad guys don't register guns but they do steal them from honest folks who maybe will now take just a little extra care to secure them. I just wish government would find a better way then wasting the billions they have - that's bad government. BTW I do enjoy shooting as much as the most of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misfish Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 12,885 Done,now the rest of you all get r done Sorry to go against the grain but as bad as this program is if it even saves one life (e.g. stolen gun recovered), I believe in a registry. Not to be ignorant or rude Ted,but what will that do? Heres what mean. Someone is shot, with a shot gun with ,say 00B. You cant tell me they will know what gun was used or who pulled the trigger.Gangs and stolen guns are out there.Why should the law abiding hunters give up thier rights? Yes ,we have nothing to hide,but it,s a CASH COW. IT,S A CROCK This is all Im going to say, as it IS a very sensitive subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black_Blade Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 In all the news stories concerning a gun related crime, very rarely do you hear in the reporting of it, whether the gun was registered or not. But that brings another question to mind...even if the police recover a rifle used in a crime that they can trace back to its legal owner..which has been stolen from him/her. What real good does that do? The gun got stolen from the owner, was used in the commission of a crime and the weapon was recovered, so now the police can go back to the owner of it and let them know their weapon has been recovered. Wow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tschirk Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 The trick is to catch the stolen gun before it's used in a crime. A registered (documented) item (gun, etc..) has a greater chance of recovery then an undocumented item. I am not trying start a debate that can't go anywhere but bad. This is just my humble opinion, and I do respect your counter opinion. Thx, Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jace Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 The trick is to catch the stolen gun before it's used in a crime. A registered (documented) item (gun, etc..) has a greater chance of recovery then an undocumented item.I am not trying start a debate that can't go anywhere but bad. This is just my humble opinion, and I do respect your counter opinion. Thx, Ted Somebody who has a chance to steal a gun will take it whether it's registered or not. A person who stores guns properly or not has nothing to do with the gun being identifiable in a database. A piece of paper telling you who owns it has nothing to do with finding it any more than knowing who owns a car helps find it after it's stolen. If a gun is stolen and found, it will get back to the owner but it will certainly not influence how quickly it can be found just as knowing a car owner's name will locate a stolen car any quicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cookslav Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 (edited) Sorry to go against the grain but as bad as this program is if it even saves one life (e.g. stolen gun recovered), I believe in a registry. Well, Its not saved a life or even "helped" to solve a single documented crime to date since it's inception so...its more or less just been a cash cow, and nuisence to responsible owners and helped to vilify the perception of firearms owners. The trick is to catch the stolen gun before it's used in a crime The logic behind such a statement is to simply limit or "tag" Firearms as a whole in hopes it lowers the amount of stolen firem arms... When in reality a responsible firearms owner would obviously report the theft thus making the registry redundant or a HUGE waste of time. (stolen legal fire arm = illegal firearm..the fact its registered does nothing to help recover it until after the crime is committed) Its not fair or productive to make us register our firearms, because a few criminals use them in contradiction of the law. Why not ban cars? Cars kill more people then guns...cars are stollen daily. Yes we register our cars...has that limited the deaths caused by cars? Nope.... So I'll pose it this way and leave it at that. If you want to kill some one....you don't NEED a gun to do it. I mean Zero offence Ted, I think we're just on the opposite side of a fence here. Edited April 11, 2009 by Cookslav Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeytier Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Signed. Over 13 000 now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leecher Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Done 13,019 now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigugli Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 13,185 now. Elmer Fudd's shotgun is not the problem, but that is what the government wanted us to believe. The weapons of choice for the criminal are hand guns and automatic weapons. They are illegal already and no amount of bureaucratic nonsense will eliminate them. The government needs to put this money into better border enforcement and inspections. That is how we reduce the gun problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caper Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 (edited) The trick is to catch the stolen gun before it's used in a crime. A registered (documented) item (gun, etc..) has a greater chance of recovery then an undocumented item. Wether a gun is registered or not and is stolen really doesn't make much difference. The person in possession of the stolen gun will not have a firearms licence and the gun will be seized and the person charged regardless..Any street rat in possession of a firearm will be dealt with accordingly. The thing that never gets mentioned is that even though the long gun registry will be gone everybody in possession of long guns will still have to have a firearms licence. The gun owners are registered still which is a good thing in my opinion. The media make out the elimination of the gun registry seem like there will be no checks and balances as to who can have possession of firearms. Those will still be there regardless of the registry. As far as the police use of the registry, it tells them who has registered firearms. It really doesn't matter how many just that they have access to firearms. Craig Oh, 13,362 Edited April 11, 2009 by caper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jace Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 13,185 now. Elmer Fudd's shotgun is not the problem, but that is what the government wanted us to believe. The weapons of choice for the criminal are hand guns and automatic weapons. They are illegal already and no amount of bureaucratic nonsense will eliminate them. The government needs to put this money into better border enforcement and inspections. That is how we reduce the gun problem. that's always been part of my argument also. thugs who carry illegal guns on the streets don't want our 40" hunting rifles that weigh 15 pounds. Even a sawn-off rifle/shotgun would be 3-4 times the size of a typical pistol or revolver. And in my lifetime, handguns have always been "restricted" firearms, harder to get, and have never been allow in hunting. Handguns are only legal for shooting at a ranges here which means most hunters and rural residents have absolutely no interest in them. They might as well start registering owners of air conditioners becasue that will be as effective in reducing gun crimes and illegal guns on the streets. at least it'll lower the price of wheat in Poland. ever see the photocopy of a registration certificate for a B&D soldering gun? hilarious. I think the application was a joke, but a registration certificate was actually issued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuro2 Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 (edited) Another fine example of propaganda making it on to OFC, and OFC allowing to exist because the moderation team is too biased to realize this. What are moderators doing posting on a thread like this? Fact - the majority of police officers think the registry helps them in their job, especially when they can check right in their cruisers if the parties in a domestic dispute own guns. http://sify.com/news/international/fullstory.php?id=14878802 For instance there is a good probability that the three policemen killed recently in the US would be alive today if the US had a gun registry. They would have known that the eventual killer of the three policemen owned several guns and would have been much more cautious before attempting to enter that house. The gun registry also benefits society in keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. Edited April 11, 2009 by scuro2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jace Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 As far as the police use of the registry, it tells them who has registered firearms. It really doesn't matter how many just that they have access to firearms. The way i heard it was it also tells them who owns what and if a crime is committed with a particular caliber rifle, they could check up on people who owned one. I don't know how long this version of the regulation lasted. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jace Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Another fine example of propaganda making it on to OFC, and OFC allowing to exist because the moderation team is too biased to realize this. What are moderators doing posting on a thread like this? Fact - the majority of police officers think the registry helps them in their job, especially when they can check right in their cruisers if the parties in a domestic dispute own guns. http://sify.com/news/international/fullstory.php?id=14878802 For instance there is a good probability that the three policemen killed recently in the US would be alive today if the US had a gun registry. They would have known that the eventual killer of the three policemen owned several guns and would have been much more cautious before attempting to enter that house. The gun registry also benefits society in keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. 1- they should always be ready for a situation with guns because there could be illegal guns anywhere. Illegal guns can be in any house just as marijuana can be in any house, not just in the residences of people with legal prescriptions for marijuana 2- mentally ill people would not pass the checks made during the Possession OR Acquisition applications. They could only get the guns illegally, in which case, having them registry is moot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walleyejigger Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 done thanks "from my cold dead hands" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BUSTER Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 ya, and iam going to start a petition to take the gst away like they said they would..... like that'll ever happen they said after brian malrony leaves we will abolish the gst.....no petition? iam also thinking of starting a petition for metallica to take back jason newstead the bass player... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caper Posted April 11, 2009 Report Share Posted April 11, 2009 Fact - the majority of police officers think the registry helps them in their job, especially when they can check right in their cruisers if the parties in a domestic dispute own guns. The gun registry also benefits society in keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. These are the facts that get distorted by the media. They are not getting rid of firearm licences for individuals. Anybody who owns or has in their possession a firearm still will have to have a firearm licence. It's just the registering of each gun that they are trying to get rid of. The police will still know that the occupant of a house has a firearm licence and possible has access to firearms. Also people who have mental health issues should be picked off in the renewal process for their firearm licence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts