SENATE BILL: Omnibus Gun Policy & Safety Act (Law'd)

[HagridOfTheDeep]

An Amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I propose this amendment because I think the current language is unconstitutional.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Article IV, Section 5 states that "the right to keep and bear fire-arms and low-potency explosives shall not be infringed." Forbidding people from possessing or transporting fire-arms pretty blatantly infringes on their right to "keep" these weapons.

We can limit the conditions surrounding gun ownership, but I don't see how we can tell certain people that they aren't allowed to possess guns. We'd have to amend the constitution. Forbidding the sale of guns to these folks is, I think, the best we can legally do.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I can't promise I'd support that.

So maybe it'd just be best to put my amendment to a vote...

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Okay: How is it not unconstitutional?

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Aye

[HagridOfTheDeep]

It'll be interesting because of the justices we have, but it really shouldn't be. The Constitution is so exceptionally clear when it says that a person's right to keep fire-arms must not be infringed. I don't see how you'd be able to make the opposite argument on this one.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I think leaving it to the regions is a better idea.

Canada had a gun registry up until relatively recently -how effective was it in terms of reducing crime?  

Its actual role in reducing crime was pretty contentious, as far as I know. The commisioner of the Ontario Provincial Police circa 2002 stated that the registry didn't seem to be much of a deterrent. A 2010 survey also found that 72% of Canadians thought it made no difference in preventing crime. Many police associations across Canada held their own votes on the registry, and the results widely varied from region to region.

I know I'm not really pointing to actual data, but it's tough to gauge correlation between crimes and the one-time event of the registry's initial passage. There were no provisions in the Firearms Act to actually study the effects of the registry on crime rates. And the thing is... it was quite possible for a person to get a gun and avoid the registry if he or she really wanted to. The people registering their guns were likely to follow the law.

Mostly, the registry helped police officers stay safe. If they were called to a home because of some sort of domestic disturbance, they'd be able to know if guns were in-play and act accordingly.

On the flip-side, there were always concerns about privacy. And, of course, the costs of operating this program were substantially bigger than the government thought they would be.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Fixed the numbering error and scrapped the registry. I agree with Frodo on this one. Marokai can indicate his unfriendliness to the amendment if he wants, and if he does, I'd be happy to see the amendment put to a vote.

An Amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Fair enough. We're in a bit of a turnover phase anyway, so I doubt there'd be enough votes. And honestly... I'd probably vote against the bill anyway.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Yeah, I know I can change it, but this place is a ghost town. Since I won't vote for it anyway, I figure it would be a waste of time.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Nay