Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28
  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    8,758
    Didn't Dennis Young have info from a FOI request showing the police and government were, shall we say LIBERALLY interpreting the "50% domestically sourced" stat?

    He found only 28% of crime guns were traced, and 50% OF THOSE were listed as "domestically sourced"

    That equals a mere 14% of all recovered crime guns being "domestically sourced"

    And as I've pointed out before, if a crime gun is recovered and can't be traced but is a make and model legally available in Canada, then it's considered "domestically sourced"

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    440
    Quote Originally Posted by RangeBob View Post
    It wasn't a crime before 2008, and then it took several years before police started charging it.
    (before 2008, it was just break and enter, rather than 'break and enter to steal a firearm')


    Canadian Firearms Registry said

    YEAR, COUNT STOLEN, Restricted&Prohibited Stolen, R&P registered, % R&P stolen
    1999 88 59
    2000 157 76
    2001 613 350
    2002 1265 440
    2003 4046 1232
    2004 3829 942
    2005 4002 771
    2006 5164 830
    2007 5244 985
    2008 3539 775 648361 0.119
    2009 5597 1015 686999 0.147
    2010 6300 1097 702429 0.156
    2011 7287 1093 727946 0.150
    2012 1838 511 767019 0.066 (partial year)

    In this case, some of the increase is due to police used to record firearms thefts in the CFIS stolen property database but not in the Canadian Firearms Program CFRO. In 2008, the CFP started demanding that police and courts tell the CFP about {police issued firearms, police seized firearms, stolen firearms, prohibition orders}



    Actually, being arrested is the largest deterrent.
    Being prosecuted (process) is the second largest deterrent.
    There's little evidence that being sentenced is a deterrent. It does keep violent offenders off the streets though, and it's the required vengeance part of justice, the part that the victims seek and demand and represents closure. Vengeance by the state on behalf of victims, replacing vengeance by victims that spirals.
    The problem is not one of deterrence, itís about protecting law abiding citizens.
    Itís not vengence, itís protection from someone who WILL commit similar or worse crimes again.

    If we really wanted to deter criminals, we would put them to work once incarcerated. Nothing is a deterrent like manual labor.

  3. #23
    Senior Member FALover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    moved close to the lake.Some call it Gilford.
    Posts
    7,667
    Maybe it's time our 'liberal' court system actually did it's job. Start sentencing those convicted of firearms theft to life imprisonment. If the guns they stole end up used in crimes, charge them as accessories to that crime as well and add it to their sentence. (and make it consecutive, not concurrent)
    cookin' up a batch of fun (and pasta)

    Can I Hear A Ramen!!!

  4. #24
    Super Moderator Rory McCanuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Middle of Manitoba
    Posts
    9,842
    Quote Originally Posted by soulchaser View Post
    Didn't Dennis Young have info from a FOI request showing the police and government were, shall we say LIBERALLY interpreting the "50% domestically sourced" stat?

    He found only 28% of crime guns were traced, and 50% OF THOSE were listed as "domestically sourced"

    That equals a mere 14% of all recovered crime guns being "domestically sourced"

    And as I've pointed out before, if a crime gun is recovered and can't be traced but is a make and model legally available in Canada, then it's considered "domestically sourced"
    And how many of them weren't guns, or the crime wasa lapsed license or something?

    Quote Originally Posted by OP
    Of 1,140 "crime guns" seized in B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, NWT and Yukon that year, only 150 were recovered following specific violent offences, including "disturbance" and "uttering threats."
    So roughly 10%, and in those cases how many were actually used?
    Quote Originally Posted by RangeBob View Post


    Crime Guns, according to the Toronto Police, include: antique firearm, air guns, nail guns, flare guns, toy guns, zip guns, stun guns, paintball guns, starters pistols, and homemade firearms. It should be obvious that Bill C-71, which adds restrictions to firearms licence holders, can have no effect whatsoever on 31.3% of domestically sourced crime guns because the Firearms Act doesn’t govern the sale or possession of these in any way.

    The definition of 'crime guns' is evolving, including more than anyone would consider crime guns because they weren't used in a violent crime. e.g. found firearms. e.g. firearms seized at the border by clueless but well meaning American visitors.

    The most recent quote about 50% domestically sourced is based on the B.C. NWEST report, which says of the 229 firearms that were successfully traced, 114 (49.8%) were found to be domestic. But 783 firearms were submitted for tracing, only 114 were domestically sourced, and that's 15%. There were 1140 crime guns in that study.
    Or, that's 10% of the total guns, including those that weren't sent for tracing.


    With all these guns that aren't guns, guns that weren't actually used in any crime, guns that weren't traceable, and prohibited home built guns that are included in the totals, it really shows what a ging show Goodale's farce really is.

    Like that one graphic from a while ago, this whole C-71 is aimed at 4 people a year.
    Two million+ have to jump through hoops because of 4 people a year, who will still find a way.
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for that clown. Oct 20, '15

  5. #25
    Senior Member Drache's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Williams Lake, BC
    Posts
    6,261
    according to the RCMP officers here in town I hang out with, if someone turns in an unwanted gun to the RCMP from a deceased family member, that is counted as a "crime gun". You find a rusted gun out in the bush that has been sitting there for 40 years, that is counted as a "crime gun". Your wife calls in a fake complaint to the RCMP of a domestic problem and the police even touch your firearms, they are counted as "crime guns".

  6. #26
    Senior Member RangeBob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    26,171
    Found Guns


    Gary Mauser wrote several papers about the changing definition of crime guns, including an alert of 'found gun'.
    A chunk of his SECU testimony, as well as his brief, was about found guns.

    Police changed the definition of crime-gun to include found guns a few years back.

    Crime gun used to be a gun that was USED as a tool to commit a crime. Given the gun, that pretty much meant some sort of violent crime (robbery, murder, attempted murder).
    This has been the definition that's used in Canada, and is the definition that's used internationally.
    So, for example, if police raided a drug gang house, and there was a 1911 sitting on top of bags of cocane, and a revolver in the pocket of another person who lived there, and there was a PALer there who had a hunting licence and attended a shooting range every week to fire a musket and had a gun safe with a 30-06 bolt action rifle and a muzzle loading flintlock rifle, then there would be 2 crime guns (the 1911 and the revolver) and 4 seized firearms.
    But today, all four would be considered crime guns, because although two had never and would never be used in a crime, they were found there.
    “Found guns” have not been used in a crime, but are just found by police during or after a contact. Any kind of contact.
    This new definition equates paper crimes with criminal violence. A firearm unsafely stored – is a “crime gun.”
    When police attend the scene of a suicide – even by hanging -- if a firearm is found in a closet, the gun is counted as a “crime gun” if the owner’s PAL has lapsed.
    Few realize that most ‘gun crime’ consists of paperwork violations. Almost all such cases are non-violent.
    They also include found firearms not immediately linked to a criminal occurrence are referred to the Suspicious Firearms Index. Law enforcement officers may come into possession of firearms suspected of being associated with criminal activity, but which are not the subject of an active investigation. These typically include found and seized firearms where no charges are pending.


    June 23, 2017
    http://justiceforgunowners.ca/should...rative-crimes/

    April 9, 2018
    http://justiceforgunowners.ca/bill-c...a-red-herring/

    April 2018
    https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Co...userGary-e.pdf

    May 29 2018
    https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....act_id=3190467


    Since non-restricted firearms are not in the LGR, a cheap trace is not possible.
    We've seen several examples of police defining not traced as domestic.
    Thus NR found is likely deemed "domestically sourced". ("deemed" is a usage from the NWEST FIESD 2014 report)

  7. The Following 2 Users Like This Post By RangeBob

    LB303 (08-18-2018), Waterloomike (08-10-2018)

  8. #27
    Senior Member RangeBob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    26,171
    further to "a cheap trace is not possible" ...

    Wendy, from the original post
    "You can imagine, police often are short-staffed and have limited resources. They're working on solving a murder investigation — focusing on tracing the source of the firearm may or may not be viewed as critical to prosecuting that particular crime.
    "And so, typically, tracing firearms has not been a top priority of police agencies across the country."

  9. #28
    Senior Member RangeBob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    26,171
    Quote Originally Posted by OriginalPost View Post
    "Between 2013 and 2016 ... break-ins for the purpose of stealing firearms went up by 56 per cent," Goodale wrote in an op-ed. That statement is supported by the statistics.

    But that statement — like the graph that accompanies Goodale's tweet — fails to capture the fact that, last year, the number of break-ins involving the theft of firearms fell again, by more than 10 per cent, leaving it below the levels of the previous two years.
    the article was revised after doug_m cut/pasted it to say

    "Between 2013 and 2016 ... break-ins for the purpose of stealing firearms went up by 56 per cent," Goodale wrote in an op-ed. That statement is supported by the statistics.

    But after Goodale wrote those words, 2017 statistics were released. They showed that last year, the number of break-ins involving the theft of firearms fell again, by more than 10 per cent, leaving it below the levels of the previous two years.
    2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
    Robbery to steal a firearm [1611] 1 3 15 16 16 5 16 12 18 18
    Breaking and entering to steal a firearm [2121] 93 238 358 449 573 516 640 761 832 750
    Break and enter to steal a firearm from a motor vehicle [2125] 13 71 315 323 340 402 360 403 440 425

    data from
    Incident-based crime statistics, by detailed violations
    Frequency: Annual
    Table: 35-10-0177-01 (formerly CANSIM 252-0051)
    https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1...pid=3510017701

    Note, these became a crime in 2008. It took a while for police to start recording them that way.
    Note that about 15% are cleared by charge.

    It used to be said that one of the benefits of the LGR was that if the firearm was stolen, it could be returned to its owner. If 15% are cleared by charge, it's gone.
    Last edited by RangeBob; 08-16-2018 at 09:41 PM.

  10. The Following User Liked This Post By RangeBob

    Doug_M (08-17-2018)

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

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