Specifically....

Posted by Michaelson from eeespace106.utsi.edu (150.182.24.106) on Tuesday, October 09, 2001 at 5:10pm :

In Reply to: Well... posted by Brett Maverick Lambert from aig65386y28se.ab.hsia.telus.net (142.59.128.139) on Tuesday, October 09, 2001 at 2:28pm :

...pistols and revolvers. The real skewing took place in the early 90's, and I have to say it was a real work of art. I used to be a technical illustrator in my youth, and had to prepare charts for the company to show the union just "how bad things were for the company" when contract negotiations took place. It's fascinating how that works. Real black magic. (grins) The Ministry of Justice asked that all law enforcement of Canada report all crimes where a firearm was present, regardless of long gun, short gun, shot gun, what ever. The law enforcment community took her at her word, and whether it was at the scene of a murder, or the report of a missing cat, the officer at the scene wandered around the home, and if any weapon was spotted, regardless of if it was locked in a gun cabinent, etc, it was written down as "firearm at crime scene". Needless to say, the stats on firearm "crime" that was turned in was astronomical. The law of registration and firearm "turn in" became law of the land. Suddenly a revision was submitted, separating the "missing cat" weapon reports from the actual violent crime reports, and needless to say, the stats dropped tremendously. This drop in numbers was claimed by the anti gun supporters as proof of the success of the new law, as gun crime had dramatically dropped, and numbers now proved it! Like I said, just an absolutely beautiful end run by the statisticians. That kind of mind game has been attempted here several times. The best I remember was one that was attempted that said that any weapon that could fire multiple rounds with the pulling of a trigger should be classified as an assalt weapon, and banned. Fortunately, a Senator questioned the wording, and it came out that the only "safe" weapon out there would then be a single action revolver (like the old Colt .45), and a single barrel shotgun and rifle, because using that description, ALL firearms are capable of the actions as described by the line above! The anti gunners knew it, and quietly with drew the proposed bill. Brett, I have NO argument with the fact that there is a problem with firearms in the hands of those who have absolutely NO reason to have one. BUT, that said, laws added to those already on the books won't solve the perceived the problems. But also bear in mind that the statistics you're repeating regarding what is occuring here in the U.S. are being put out by the anti-gunners, and like your statiticians in your country, are skewed so far from the truth it's pathetic. High regards, my friend. Michaelson

: ...I can't say anything to the skewing of the stats at the time the vote took place (when was it exactly? In the 80's?), but I'll take your word for it, afterall, manipulating stats is something any political, religious, etc. group has done from time to time in order to further their cause, it's not right, but it's certainly nothing new. Is my opinion in the minority in Canada? I'm really not so sure about that. The nation is lead under Jean Chretien (from the Liberal party), he's won the majority for the last 8 years, and his approval rating right now is at one of the highest it's ever been, and Liberals are more for gun-control laws (generally speaking).

: But what is this of Canadians not having the right to own guns? My former Biology teacher owns a bunch of rifles (he loves to hunt), one of my Dad's dentist friends needed to get his gun registered last year. Sounds like those two have the right to own firearms. Could you clarify what you meant by "removing the people's right to own firearms was taken"?

Indygear Follow Ups: Post a Followup Name: E-Mail: ( default ) Subject: Message: : ...pistols and revolvers. The real skewing took place in the early 90's, and I have to say it was a real work of art. I used to be a technical illustrator in my youth, and had to prepare charts for the company to show the union just "how bad things were for the company" when contract negotiations took place. It's fascinating how that works. Real black magic. (grins) The Ministry of Justice asked that all law enforcement of Canada report all crimes where a firearm was present, regardless of long gun, short gun, shot gun, what ever. The law enforcment community took her at her word, and whether it was at the scene of a murder, or the report of a missing cat, the officer at the scene wandered around the home, and if any weapon was spotted, regardless of if it was locked in a gun cabinent, etc, it was written down as "firearm at crime scene". Needless to say, the stats on firearm "crime" that was turned in was astronomical. The law of registration and firearm "turn in" became law of the land. Suddenly a revision was submitted, separating the "missing cat" weapon reports from the actual violent crime reports, and needless to say, the stats dropped tremendously. This drop in numbers was claimed by the anti gun supporters as proof of the success of the new law, as gun crime had dramatically dropped, and numbers now proved it! Like I said, just an absolutely beautiful end run by the statisticians. That kind of mind game has been attempted here several times. The best I remember was one that was attempted that said that any weapon that could fire multiple rounds with the pulling of a trigger should be classified as an assalt weapon, and banned. Fortunately, a Senator questioned the wording, and it came out that the only "safe" weapon out there would then be a single action revolver (like the old Colt .45), and a single barrel shotgun and rifle, because using that description, ALL firearms are capable of the actions as described by the line above! The anti gunners knew it, and quietly with drew the proposed bill. Brett, I have NO argument with the fact that there is a problem with firearms in the hands of those who have absolutely NO reason to have one. BUT, that said, laws added to those already on the books won't solve the perceived the problems. But also bear in mind that the statistics you're repeating regarding what is occuring here in the U.S. are being put out by the anti-gunners, and like your statiticians in your country, are skewed so far from the truth it's pathetic. High regards, my friend. Michaelson : : ...I can't say anything to the skewing of the stats at the time the vote took place (when was it exactly? In the 80's?), but I'll take your word for it, afterall, manipulating stats is something any political, religious, etc. group has done from time to time in order to further their cause, it's not right, but it's certainly nothing new. Is my opinion in the minority in Canada? I'm really not so sure about that. The nation is lead under Jean Chretien (from the Liberal party), he's won the majority for the last 8 years, and his approval rating right now is at one of the highest it's ever been, and Liberals are more for gun-control laws (generally speaking). : : But what is this of Canadians not having the right to own guns? My former Biology teacher owns a bunch of rifles (he loves to hunt), one of my Dad's dentist friends needed to get his gun registered last year. Sounds like those two have the right to own firearms. Could you clarify what you meant by "removing the people's right to own firearms was taken"? Optional Link ( default ) URL: Title: Optional Image Link ( default ) URL: This board is powered by the Mr. Fong Device from Cyberarmy.com