Some people also skip the ad hominem arguments.

Also, One holds off on referencing the Sun for the same reason one might hold off on referencing the Star.

So Walkom is sold on the registry as a vital element of a firearms strategy, allowing police to “follow the follow individual weapons and ensure they remain in the hands of licensed owners.”
How in the hell would it do that? Yes, it follows some individual weapons, but there is nothing whatsoever that can be done to have significant confidence that the gun remains in the hands of licensed owners. This presupposes that the registry prevents theft somehow.

An unproven argument from the anti-registry side is that the data is susceptible to hackers, offering an increased risk to society. While there is no published proof of such an attack to date , It presents a hell of an attractive target to someone so inclined. As Walkom offered in his article, the registry is a great starting point for future actions likely to be about as well received.

And again, with the numbers. 63 deaths down to 50! 23 deaths down to 8! So what. There were likely a pile of other initiatives that could have been executed to achieve similar or better results for the cost.

love the body fluids bit. if everyone had to give their body fluids, I’d be more comfortable with that than the singling out of a particular group.

Some people are smart enough to look beyond ideology, and examine the evidence.

I’d like to believe that I would challenge any motion that I saw as unreasonable and unsupportable that places society at risk.

Agreed, we’re members of the same society. but it’s violence and lack of education that’s at issue, not guns. That’s how arguments about “rising crime” and “ rising teen pregnancy”, and so on resonate so much, despite the fact that they may not be true.

I think there might be a reasonable analogy with Islamophobia, Some Muslims get radicalized, and some radicalized muslims have killed thousands of people, we should have a registry of all Muslims!

As I’ve said before, I am FOR stopping gun violence. A registry is just not the way to go about it, there’s not enough of a link there, and the risks of a registry outweigh the benefits.

Ignoring the fact that guns are not cars, and the distribution of cars is a tad more widespread across the population than Gun ownership, the car registry doesn’t prevent crimes.

Outside, perhaps of some of the arguments presented by Matt and Kate, arguments from the pro-registry side tend towards being emotional, irrational, or just plain ignorant.

I acknowledge that there may be some indirect benefits to the registry, it may make a police officer’s job marginally easier, the issue here is that the cost for that marginal benefit is too high, both financially and to people’s personal freedoms.

It’s guns in this particular discussion, but what if this line of reasoning was applied to other, perhaps more vulnerable segments.

Again
training and licensing gun owners – not at issue
REquiring safe storage of firearms – not at issue

Even Handguns, whose portability and limited use, the registry not at issue.

Having a list of farmers, hunters, and target shooters, people who pose no more threat of violence that people who don’t participate in those pastimes, is.

It doesn’t take much to erode personal freedoms, most people don’t even notice the tiny steps.

Just because an argument is american doesn’t make it useless. Like “ Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither”

The fear with the registry is it’s potential for misuse, or for use above and beyond it’s originally stated purpose.
Suppose an act of government was to make gun ownership illegal. Immediately, a large segment if the population become criminals.

Beyond that, and make no mistake, I trust the police as a whole, but recent events have indicated that individuals within the service are prone to remarkably poor judgment.

I’ve also read that rank and file officers don’t provide the same vociferous support that the leaders do, but that there has been no commissioned survey to confirm that.

Suppose that’s another issue.

That said, as far as a “violent offender registry” is concerned, it sounds to me like you’re talking about criminal records. So don’t worry, dude, Canada’s police are totally on it. And beyond that, there’s a wealth of statistics and information these services continually collect and analyze.

And it’s got to be said that the fact that they do collect and use this information doesn’t in any way invalidate the value of the registry, which is a vital part of that preventative process.