Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12
  1. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    B.C., lower mainland
    Quote Originally Posted by IJ22 View Post
    What if the gun was smuggled into Canada and you bought it via classified ad? Is smuggling an offense? Could be, if they want it to be, the bill doesn't say. So, go to jail.
    Good point.

  2. #12
    Senior Member RangeBob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Sir Robert Peel's Principles of Law Enforcement 1829
    1.The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
    9.The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.

    It has been the unofficial policy of the Canadian Firearms Program to get as many firearms registered as possible, and not pay too much attention to the legality before registration. The idea is simple: a registered firearm is not on the street, being sold between gang members and likely to be used in violent crime. By accepting the registration, while a little distasteful to law enforcement because there may be an unpunished lawbreaker out there somewhere, is nonetheless extremely consistent with Peel's Principles and the good of the nation.

    A lot of citizens don't believe the prior paragraph, and even I believe that if a PALer mumbles about any suspicion of illegal activity about the acquisition of the firearm during the registration then a visit by police detectives will ensue. It was one of the advantages of getting rid of the LGR that suddenly citizens could buy otherwise criminally possessed firearms without even the risk of that (e.g. stolen, smuggled, whatever), thus getting firearms off the streets. Because there are more PALers than criminals-who-will-pay-for-firearms, and PALers tend to be interested in public safety, the net result is that more firearms would be 'off the streets' than returned to the streets as a result of getting rid of the LGR (although Wendy-types might focus only on the negative rather than the net)

    The original post's proposed Law gets rid of that.
    Criminals will have to sell to criminals who 'need' to use a firearm nefariously, the worst of 'on the street'.
    Not just an unintended consequence, but actually a net evil.
    Data does not equal information, and information does not equal understanding.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts