This summer we have had a very vigorous debate regarding long gun registry when the government proposed a bill to kill the gun registry bill. The numbers for support of the registry were very close and the closer the numbers came the hotter the debate. The gun registry was kept but the government sponsored the bill to kill the registry was defeated by the combined opposition.
Now I like to be open minded about issues, but I like to see a fair debate with an absence of tactics which bend the logic.
One objection I have is the claim that the law makes criminals out of honest people such as farmers and hunters. I object strongly to this as the law does not make anybody a criminal. People make themselves criminals by breaking the law and getting caught and being convicted. People make a choice to break a law. The law does nothing to make them criminals. I've worked with enough bad guys and they realize that the choices they made got them into trouble. Pot sellers would like this idea that the law makes them a criminal not their selling of pot. I'm sure murderers would like this slant. Kill the murder laws because they make people into criminals. Opponents use this angle because some people refused to register their guns and got caught.
Another objection I have is to refer to gun registry as "gun control." Gun registry is not "gun control." The issue should be called gun registry. "Gun control" brings too much emotional baggage with it. Even Priminister Harper got caught up using the term "gun control" rather than gun registry. A Priminster should know that the law doesn't make the criminal.
Another myth that was promoted heavily is that the long gun registry was a device to go into a residence and confiscate the guns. Nothing could be further from the truth. Great emotional stories are told about little old guys having their guns confiscated and we are to feel sorry for them. Police will seize guns when an offense has been committed. If someone discharges a fire arm too close to a residence and someone complains the shooter is going to be in trouble and should be in trouble as it is dangerous. Whether there is gun registry or not if you discharge a fire arm too close to a residence you will be in trouble. Don't blame the gun registry for your troubles.
Opponents ignore the fact that major safety regulations accompanied gun registration. Gun safety courses have been developed and taught by gun owners. GOOD!
Opponents like to push the point that gun registry doesn't prevent crime. Gun registry was not about preventing crime. Gun registry assists police in their work if they have some idea who has guns. Again safety is an issue. This argument is extended to great lengths by bringing in all kinds of objects which could be used as weapons.
Opposition to gun registry has a good case. Opponents have done themselves harm by stretching their points unnecessarily. They also brought in the NRA. Not fair when you bring a foreign group in to help you fight your cause. It was rather interesting to follow comments on stories and see that the same guy wrote in his comment many times trying to inflate the opposition. This tactic just looks exactly like it is...SILLY.
To this point I was somewhat apathetic about gun registry. Whatever happened would have been acceptable to me. I am not anti hunting. Hunting is legal and is well regulated although I think they should have closed grizzly bear hunting many years ago. The tactics used by gun registry opponents has attracted my attention. I dislike tactics which are bent. From now on I will be a much more active supporter of gun registry. I have started by writing this piece.