[cuchulainn]

You know a government prohibition/control effort is a not-working, out-of-control mess when it gets a "czar."

I haven't seen the bit about adding airguns to the registry (last paragraph) -- is that true. If so: :what:

from the Calgary Sun

http://www.canoe.ca/CalgaryNews/cs.cs-05-07-0041.htmlWednesday, May 7, 2003

New gun law gets fired up
Final shots taken at legislation

By MARIA MCCLINTOCK, OTTAWA BUREAU

OTTAWA -- A new firearms bill that creates a gun czar and is expected to streamline the problem-plagued gun registry has cleared its final hurdle.

The legislation passed by a 135 to 93 vote in the Commons last night.

The new law, known as Bill C-10A, was put on the backburner in February because of an uproar over additional funding for the already bloated gun registry that's expected to cost Canadians an estimated $1 billion by 2005.

Opposition MPs made a last-ditch effort during a special 30-minute question period yesterday to press the government to reveal the costs of the embattled federal gun registry, but weren't rewarded with the price tag.

When the gun registry was introduced in 1995, the government estimated that it would cost $2 million, but Auditor General Sheila Fraser revealed the true cost of the gun program will likely hit $1 billion.

Solicitor General Wayne Easter, who just inherited the firearms program from Justice Minister Martin Cauchon, insisted the new law will lead to cost improvements.

"In terms of the $2 million cost, admittedly so, it was the net cost of the program originally estimated," Easter told the Commons.

"We are not at $1 billion. By 2005, we may reach that point."

Originally, the feds estimated the new law would save $3.4 million a month. That figure has since been revised to $1 million a month in savings.

But Canadian Alliance MP Garry Breitkreuz said the new law won't clean up the problems in the federal gun registry program.

"They're floundering, they really don't know what they're doing, and the new minister really doesn't have a handle on this file at all," said Breitkreuz, who has uncovered years of problems with the gun registry.

"This won't make any difference. I think it's going to make things worse; capturing all the airguns in the system is going to be a can of worms."

Copyright © 2003, Sun Media Corporation / Netgraphe inc.

[foghornl]

capturing all the airguns in the system is going to be a can of worms."

Three bits of free advice for Canada's registry program:

The only way to reseal a can of worms is to use a bigger can.
Never open a can of worms unless you are fishing.
A can of worms is not as much fun as a barrel of monkeys.

[SDC]

The law as it stood before this BS was that any airgun which fired a projectile at more than 500 feet per second (152.4 metres per second) was considered a "real" firearm for the purposes of buying, selling, etc. A BIG wrench was thrown into the works when people started coming out with these light-weight plastic "hypervelocity" pellets, which made almost EVERY airgun a "real" firearm (meaning they had to be registered, an airgun with a barrel less than 4 1/4" was considered "prohibited", any airgun that was also a handgun could only be taken to a range and back, etc., etc.). To avoid this hassle, the scumbag Liberals simply said "We'll change the cut-off to ENERGY, instead of velocity." So now, if an airgun fires a pellet at under 500 fps OR under 5.7 Joules of energy, they'll consider it a non-firearm, at least for the purposes of licencing, registration, etc. I'm sick of this country, and I want to move; any suggestions?