Does Canada’s Long Gun Registry Save Lives?

That’s the question being asked by the Vancouver Sun. I don’t really get how the answer is yes. If you’re using the registry to trace a gun, doesn’t that imply someone was already shot with it? Looks like advocates of the registry in Canada are now pointing out that if the registry is lifted, guns like the Ruger Mini-14, that horrific killing machine used in Norway, wouldn’t have to be registered.

Umm…. wasn’t Breivik’s Mini-14 registered, with all the proper paperwork? Hate to tell you folks, but pieces of paper don’t stop bullets.

8 thoughts on “Does Canada’s Long Gun Registry Save Lives?”

  1. Have they actually solved any crimes with their registry?

    I know none of the state-side registries have any accomplishments except registering guns.

    How can it save lives if it has anything to do with stopping criminals or preventing crimes.

  2. No, registration does not save lives, but it does fit the fantasy narrative that gun owners can’t be trusted. And it facilitates citizen disarmament.

  3. Interesting statistic in the article that 69% of murders with firearms use hand guns, which are effectively banned in Canada altogether. Equally interesting is that 1/3 of Canadian murders are committed with knives and another third without guns or knives (hockey sticks, maybe?)

  4. Careful with “none.” California does use handgun registration to seize guns from people who become prohibited. However, lazy law enforcement keep being slow which has lead to a couple of serious incidents you’ve not heard much about. Because if you did CA would have to explain why thy didn’t stop the guy with all the supposed tools they want in place…

    Food for better pro-gun arguments.


  5. As Gene points out, these systems require resources to make them effective. In CA, as in many other states, the laws are on the books, but the resources (money, money to hire people, money to train people, money to maintain databases) aren’t there to enforce compliance. So the only people who comply are the ones you didn’t have to worry about in the first place.

  6. Handguns are not “effectively banned altogether” in Canada. There are just more bureaucratic hoops for Canadians to jump through before they can be legally owned, and there are restrictions on other things which pertain to handguns, such as minimum barrel length.

  7. Name one person it saved! Just one! It’s been a bunch of pie-in-the-sky craptalk is what it’s been. Socialist BS meant to express their self-righteous, politically motivated, animosity towards their political adversaries, private gun owners, which it has done, it has harassed law-abiding gun owners, it’s been effective at that, but saved lives? No. Not one person can be named whose life it has saved. So it’s BS, plain and simple, and should be dispensed with as the wrongful, wasteful nonsense that it is. It makes the commie libs feel good about abusing people they don’t like, but that’s just plain wrong of them and should be ended. Get rid of it!

  8. Chas,

    Just as DGUs don’t make the news, neither does the crazy guy who didn’t go postal because California PD seized his firearms after a judge determined he was a danger to self or others or he or his family chose not to contest his disarmament.

    Crazy people are crazy…


Comments are closed.