50 years is a long time to keep a gun. How many things does your family have that they bought 50, 40, 30, even 20 years ago?


2010 Total expenditures C$280.5 billion

be 4 or 65 million the cost of the gun registry is chump change compared the over all budget.

An appointment to the Canadian Senate is like winning the cash for life lottery. Senators earn $132,300 a year as a base salary, serve until age 75, and last year sat in the Senate for only 69 days. The total cost for Canadian taxpayers to maintain the Senate in 2008-2009 was $90,232,000.


Get rid of the senate. that will pay for the gun registry and have money left over.

put everything in one post.

the firearms registery is run by the RCMP. so this is an RCMP report saying they are going good?...

the cost of running the entire firearms center itself (long gun registery + licences + restricted registry etc) has been estimated at 65 mill a year (by the RCMP...). to break down what only the long gun portion of that would likly be impossible. but just the cost of the stamps of mailing letters to long gun owners every year is over 1.5 million. if they kept every staff member, every peice of IT equiment, the entire office etc. and only got rid of doing the paper work. then maybe your number is right. but that would be a wrong number, many would be laid off, and lots of other costs could be cut. making the number alot more then 4 million

also that 65mill that doesn't include many other costs such as police costs and time to enforce it (raiding peoples houses who forgot to renew they licence), judges, crown lawyers ect from all the appeals against the current laws and the 'criminals" in court from failing to renew them licences etc. all of this costs tax payers much more and is also wasted money. and a waste of police and court time and resources. dealing with "paper criminals"

when the auditer general tryed to do a cost report she couldn't compleate it because many cost documents were not availavable from the liberals. they had burried the costs and spending of the registery into other areas to hide the true costs.

exactly my point... if you've never been convicted you'll have no problem in buying guns and then you can get "robbed" wah-la gangster has a gun traced to the owner who reported it stolen

get rid of the senate, the gun registry, and the tax payer money to political parties. and lots of other things. the government spending is bloated everywhere.

or vote for the NDP. who want to tax and spend more

The role of tax payer funding to political parties isn't something that can be dropped without massive consequences like the gun registry, I agree with cutting out bloated government spending, but you need to do it logically. I don't want American style politics in Canada, that would be a tradgedy of epic proportions.
Posted via RS Mobile

Logically long guns outnumber hand guns 15 to 1, so logically it cannot cost $4M of the $65M spent every year on the gun registry.

If you want to talk logically please bring some logic to the table. American style politics is an uneducated popularity contest - your, and many other Canadians, lack of understanding pushes us closer to that type of politics.

There was a report that showed that tax payer funding could be easily dropped. I'll see if I can find the statscan article again, yet they compiled a ratio of how much each party raises vs gets from tax payers. The Liberals were above 1:1, the Conservatives close to 2:1, and the NDP greater than 2:1. So those 3 parties are doing fine raising their own funds. There was no info on the Greens, yet last election they were raising > $100M/day which would put them > 2:1 as well.

Which party serves to lose hugely from abolishing the tax payer funding? The BQ. They were like 0.1:1, raising virtually nothing compared to what they get from the tax payer. Considering we all hate the fucking separatists - this would be the single best way to limit how effective they can be while barely affecting the other parties.

Yet I know this cause I don't believe in American style politics and educate myself :p

You understand the process of getting a hand gun is a lot longer than getting a long gun and so it costs more?

Tories would be least affected from the removal of party subsidies. This is because the Tories have an impressive grassroots program, which the other parties lack. The amount the NDP gets from donations pales in comparison to the Conservatives. If you looked at official statistics, Tories benefit much more from private donations than party subsidies and that's why they want to get rid of it.

Harper's excuse that he wanted to "save money" is BS. This was purely a move to get rid of his opposition, and nothing else. Party subsidies prevent American-style, corporate-dominated politics.

We want parties that appeal to all Canadians, not those that can pander to richer individuals and win with massive funding.

That's not cool, you have no reason to call my understanding uninformed and degrading the discussion to personal insults isn't something anyone benefits from. Even though I feel like some people with opposing views in the political discussions are uninformed idiots, you are not a member of the group Taylor, I bite my tongue to keep everything focused on what counts, the facts. I've repeatedly said that that $4 million per year for long guns is a figure way to low, I suggested earlier that the total annual cost of the gun registry could probably be cut in half by by dropping long guns. I don't think that's unreasonable considering there are a lot of fixed expenses that would not change if only the restricted registry were kept and that restricted weapons cost more per gun to track. My concern on dropping tax payer funding to political parties is that it opens the door to allowing corporate funding, that's what's made American politics such a glorified popularity contest based on who can afford more commercials. (I hate not being able to break my response down to seperate paragraphs on mobile) Posted via RS Mobile

"American style politics" are you talking about iggy the american?

he'll be going back down there to live and work after he loses....

corperate funding was stoped a while ago.

The long gun registry is here to stay because Harper will never get a majority. End discussion/

it'll be gone soon because the liberal / NDP collialation will ban all guns, therefore no need for registery

although all the employees will be in charge of starting at the blank computer screens for the next years 30 years. because heaven forbird they lay off government workers. so it'll still cost us 65 mill a year.

No, we're not talking about iggy the American, who ironically ran the least American style campaign of any leader. I actually quite like Iggy, I met him when he was in BC once and you could tell he's an extremely intelligent and passionate man when talking to him. Also, whether or not he returns to the states is pure speculation, but a teaching position at Yale is a damn good reason to live in the states if he did go that route. Posted via RS Mobile

Please, state your reasoning on why the liberals or ndp would refuse to lay off government workers when a program is shut down... Posted via RS Mobile

I'm on the gun registry is a complete waste of money bandwagon. All the reasons have already been stated but the bang for the buck is terrible. Criminals don't register their guns and those who do don't generally use them for crimes. There is always exceptions to the rules but overall in the grand scheme of things it's totally inefficient and a waste.

We take away cars from reckless drivers. We do indeed. We impound them and if the drivers are really bad. Sometimes they take them away forever. In fact, the police have found taking away someone's car is a far more effective punishment for curbing shitty behavior then taking away their license, hence the new speeding and drunk driving laws.

You understand that process has been around longer than the gun registry - right? :failed:

You reply to my thread, yet you ignore what I wrote. Nice job.

The NDP actually have the best supporters. Compared to what the parties get from the vote subsidy, the NDP raises more than the Conservatives. Thus removing the vote subsidy hurts the Conservatives more than the NDP, or even the Greens.

Before you respond, please at least try to read and comprehend what I wrote.

Its only an insult if you feel insulted. I point out the truth, that you are very uninformed on the issue.

Fact: Long guns dominate registered firearms in Canada, 15 to 1, so anyone who believes it will only save $4M of $65M is very uninformed.

I did not call you an idiot, you assumed that. Not my fault you think you are an idiot. :p

and how much would you like to spend researching how to better organize this government agency? This again, is why your opinion is uninformed and uneducated. There is a reason the gun registry bloated to $1B, and we don't need more non-sense of restructuring it.

Again you're uninformed and uneducated. The current laws are very strict in terms of donations. They were put in place by the Liberals ($5000 personal limit) and made stricter by the Conservatives (lowered to $1000 limit).

The Conservatives actually hurt the Liberals by lowering to $1000 since it is mostly corporations that support the Liberals and this lowered how much they could funnel to their party. Oh wait - you probably didn't know that either - that the Liberal party has historically been more funded by corporations, while the Conservatives are grassroot funded. So which party is the big bad party catering to corporations? Ya - egg on your face.

You may not like me talking down to you cause then you feel stupid, yet I am not calling you stupid. I am pointing out how very wrong you are, and if you continue to feel stupid you only have yourself to blame.

In this case Johnny is the uninformed one. :)

The Chretien Liberals cut the public service in the 90s when they had to drastically balance the budget - yet I do think the Iggy Liberals are not the same and would spend spend spend like the NDP.

Agreed, but you must agree that restricted registry costs more that $1.4 a year.



I don't think I'm an idiot, I think most people on rs and most people involved in political discussions are though. I admit when my parties are wrong and when there are gaps in my knowledge; I'm not old enough to really remember the liberals being in power so I have a bit an excuse.



It seems that it should be possible to have a non-government account analyze a compelte set of the gun registry expenses and determine what ones are fixed, what are divided between long and restricted, and what are exclusive to either and give us a real figure on the savings of scrapping long guns. I don't even care that much if the long gun registry is scrapped, I'd just like to make an informed decision based on realistic numbers.

Marco911 restructures failing businesses, maybe we should hire him to fix the long gun registry :troll:



I learned something, thank you. Every article I find is so partisan it's hard to research something and find solid facts.
Posted via RS Mobile