Concealed weapon permit holder

FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, July 12, 2001

In response to the furor over Patrick Purdy and his firearm, the California legislature defined and banned the "assault weapon." In 1989, it passed the Roberti-Roos bill, which listed roughly 70 firearms, generally identified by make and model and required owners of these guns to register them with the state. Additionally the legislature further defined "assault weapons" to include guns with specific characteristics such as pistol grips, magazine capacity, and other cosmetic features. The law was so draconian that even after gun-owners registered their rifles, the guns could not be sold or bequeathed.

By the 1991 cut-off date, only 34,000 firearms were registered, from an estimated 250,000 to 1 million firearms, and manufacturers renamed their firearms to avoid those named guns.

The gun banners responded to the renamed firearms and in 1991 amended the "assault weapons" law declaring that AR-15 and AK-47 "series" guns (defined as other models, regardless of manufacturer, "that are only variations, with minor differences") were "assault weapons" too.

Those amendments led to more unwitting "assault weapon" violators. People like Desert Hot Springs Police Officer Steven O'Connor was arrested and prosecuted by his own department just last year for possessing a Maadi RML rifle, incorrectly deemed an AK "series" gun. It isn't. It took ten months for the case to be dismissed; but he still isn’t back on the job.

Due to poor registration compliance, the legislature also included money for an "education campaign" and extended the grace period for registration until March 1992. If a gun owner was caught with an unregistered gun after that date and prosecuted, it was possible for him to register the offending firearm, thereby reducing the felony to an infraction, and get his gun back. Former Republican Attorney General Dan Lungren, not wishing to further alienate gun owners, as he was planning to run for Governor in 1998, extended the registration date, causing Handgun Control, Inc.(HCI) to file suit.
http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=23707

Canada set to repeal registration of hunting rifles, shotguns
4/6/2010 8:48:00 AM


After nearly 20 years, Canada appears poised to end one of its boldest experiments in gun control - the required registration of long guns, or shotguns and hunting rifles.

Last November, a bill to abolish the Long-Gun Registry, enacted in 1995 and gradually phased in through 2003, passed a second reading in the Canadian House of Commons by a tally of 164 to 137. It faces a third and final reading in that chamber later this year; prospects are good for passage in the Canadian Senate.

The bill would delete from federal law the obligation to register so-called nonrestricted firearms, though licensing requirements for long-gun owners to buy or possess firearms and to buy ammunition would remain in place.

The legislation would also require all registration information collected to date to be destroyed.

About 7 million long guns have been registered, but as many as 8 million guns, according to various estimates, have not been in what many say is outright defiance. The Conservative government has also extended to May 16, 2011, an existing amnesty for rifle and shotgun owners facing charges for failing to register their firearms.

Opponents cite runaway costs, gun rights, and lack of effectiveness in pushing the repeal measure. The author of the legislation, MP Candice Hoeppner, says the registration requirement pays lip service to reducing crime without actually doing so.

"Canadian taxpayers have shelled out $2 billion and counting to hassle hunters, farmers and sport shooters with registration requirements, while receiving nothing in return in crime reduction or prevention," Hoeppner told a recent gathering of the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (OFAH).

In an article written for London Free Press, Hoeppner called the registry a "massive" policy failure.

"It makes no sense to force law-abiding individuals with firearms licenses to register their long-guns," she wrote. "It makes no sense to believe the registry will prevent a gun crime from taking place."

And, Hoeppner stated, the $2 billion could have been better spent.
http://www.lakelandtimes.com/main.asp?SectionID=9&SubSectionID=9&ArticleID=11192