Another stupid argument people use to justify scrapping the long gun registry

The Conservative government says there is no evidence the registry has saved a single life.

Well, even with a reality-challenged bunch like the CONs, this should be seen as a ridiculous statement.  If cops get a call concerning domestic abuse, use the registry to see what firearms might be in the house, take precautions accordingly, and resolve the situation without anyone blowing anyone else’s brains out, the police report isn’t likely to state that the gun registry saved lives.  But it may well have.

If a stolen firearm used in a crime is traced to its original owner through the registry, the cops could learn that other firearms may also be in the suspect’s possession so when the cops go to arrest the criminal, they know to prepare themselves for more than one loaded rifle.  The cops seize the rifles, taking them away from a criminal who might have gun-happy buddies, and no one gets their head blown off by those long guns.  Again, the police report doesn’t say the registry saved lives, but it well may have.

The registry allows cops to have a better idea what they are facing when they get a call, and it allows them to remove long guns from people who should not have them.  Hard concept to follow, I know, but if you know there’s a loaded rifle in the hands of a disturbed person, you have a better chance of diffusing the situation without someone getting killed.  If you take long guns out of circulation when they end up in the hands of criminals, those rifles can’t be used to kill anyone.

Fuck!  That’s a hell of a lot easier to understand than the ozone layer.