Talk:Canadian Firearms Registry

message: I have deleted the following, not because its not true (it probably is), but because it hasn't been properly cited (November 2008 and May 2008). I leave it here in case someone wants to find cites for it and put it back
*The Auditor General's report found other significant problems with the way the project had been handled. These included significant questions around the financial management of the project. In particular, the report stated that estimated project costs often excluded project costs incurred by other agencies, such as the RCMP and provincial governments, giving a false impression of real cost. Problems were likewise reported with how funds were requested from Parliament, with 70% of funds requested through "supplementary estimates," a method intended for unanticipated expenditures and requiring only a one-line statement to Parliament on the purpose of the request . In comparison, only 10% of funds for all other programs in the department were requested in this way over the same period.
--76.10.163.221 (talk) 00:14, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Cost Overruns

message: I have added the redirect back to Gun politics in Canada. It looks like some thought went into making this decision quite recently. I realise that the gun registry is a big issue atm so I have added quite a lot of detail and broken the article into sections, so it is east to find the gun registry information. I realise that there is may be an argument for moving the gun registry out into an article of its own, but as gun politics is the longer standing and more heavily edited article I thought it made sense to improve it and stick with the vfd decision that was made. Pasd 16:36, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: re-redirected

message: I just removed the following statement from "Use of the Registry":
"Statistics Canada data show that Canada's total violent crime rate fell 2 per cent last year, and has been in decline since 1992. This same data show that the national homicide rate increased 12 per cent to 622 victims last year, after hitting a 36-year-low in 2003."
If you don't see the problem with this statement, may I remind you that the price of gas went up since 1992 - can you also attribute this to gun control?
Wikipedia is supposed to be NPOV. 
--Sheldonc 02:57, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Unrelated Information Removed

message: "It also required gun buyers to take training courses on the safe usage of weapons."
From Gun politics in Canada:
"Legislative provisions between 1977 and 1979 required Firearms Acquisition Certificates for all weapons and provided controls on the selling of ammunition. Fully automatic weapons were prohibited. Applicants for Firearms Acquisition Certificates were required to take a safety course."
Safety courses were in place long before the gun registry. If anybody can prove that the registry somehow extended the reach of these courses, explain how.
It seems as if the article was edited to make the gun registry palatable to the masses. Biased.
--Sheldonc 03:21, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsupported/False statement removed

message: I am not surprised that there would be a lot of dispoute over content on this page. This is an empitional issue for many people. But we have to remember thet Wikipedia is not a soap box. We should try to present both sides here, not one "correct and unquestionably right" view.  
Please see WP:NPOV for more information on writing point-of-view-free articles. Ground Zero | t 21:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. These sections are very speculative, without any references and probably could be removed. (Probably added by anon users as well) That said, I doubt this article will ever be truly neutral. The program is immensely unpopular. --Sheldonc 04:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The registry check is done automatically along with other searched for information, so the true utility of the registry isn't known - no one has published any figures on how often the registry is checked for reasons specific to firearms offences, etc.Michael Dorosh 20:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: I'm gonna need help with this.  The external link references in this article needs to be made into proper citations.  --JFred 21:23, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: doneMichael Dorosh 21:32, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: The Beretta CX4 Storm rifle can be legally purchased and owned by a civilian in Canada, however because of its legal classification, specific criteria must be met with different configurations of the CX4 Storm rifle.  The CX4 Storm rifle as manufactured by Beretta is a semi-automatic, center-fire rifle that has the legal classification of "restricted" in Canada when found in the original factory configuration possessing a barrel length of 422mm.  Any person possessing a firearms licence (PAL) with "restricted" licence privileges may purchase this firearm, subject to the approval of the Chief Firearms Officer of the respective province; and in addition the rifle is subject to a more stringent set of rules for possession and use because of its legal classification.In the case of Kimveer Gill, he did have a gun license and it was registered with Canadian gun registry; therefore, he owned the weapon legally under Canadian law. LindaWarheads 22:33, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Dawson College Shooting]]

message: here is the link I wanted to add, it is not spam as some bots are assuming it is. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XOmUXycDPs
--216.110.236.243 (talk) 19:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And how is this a reliable source, what about linking to the original, etc. etc.  And for the information you try to link it to, please read up on WP:SOAPBOX.  And though a bot is not a person, there is no reason to call it names.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: since some bots are being twats

message: The first two sentences in this paragraph are unsourced and I will delete them if no one has any reason why they should be included.  While I am sure that some people thought the registry would lead to "the confiscation of all guns in Canada" that did not represent the mainstream opposition to the bill.  The article would be improved if someone could add why the Conservatives, New Democrats and Bloc opposed the bill.  The Four Deuces (talk) 16:15, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Initial opposition 

message: I'm troubled by the fact that this whole section seems to depend on a piece from the Red Deer Advocate, which is a local paper without any national scope.   The title, "Liberals just keep wasting our money", implies that this is an opinion piece rather than reportage.  I'm going to look for a better source for this.   A man in space (talk) 13:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  allegations of lobbying section 

message: It doesn't seem to be functional. Can someone confirm this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.12.55 (talk) 02:12, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  citation 18 

message: Should we say the Long Gun Registry is now abolished after the conservatives scrap it  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.188.102.112 (talk) 08:32, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newspaper 

message: There was some reverting of contradictory figures on gun owner's compliance with C-68, namely LUFA's figure of 30% and a CBC report stating 75%. Given the widely divergent claims on both sides, it seems reasonable to have both views represented. The Coalition for Gun Control claims 90% compliance, so a reference to that source was added. Blotto adrift (talk) 20:16, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compliance 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Canadian Firearms Registry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150131205029/http://www.cacp.ca/media/news/download/1196/Bill_C-19_LGR_Presentation_Final,_Nov_17_,2011.pdf to http://www.cacp.ca/media/news/download/1196/Bill_C-19_LGR_Presentation_Final,_Nov_17_,2011.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:45, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Canadian Firearms Registry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130120204109/http://www.lufa.ca/quickfacts.asp to http://www.lufa.ca/quickfacts.asp
*Added  tag to http://www.guncontrol.ca/English/Home/Facts/FactsofProgram.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130511133546/http://www.cdnshootingsports.org/2010/08/Press_Release_Chiefs_Jones_20100824.html to http://www.cdnshootingsports.org/2010/08/Press_Release_Chiefs_Jones_20100824.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.taxpayer.com/node/10947
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927070637/http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/notice-avis/com-con-eng.htm to http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/notice-avis/com-con-eng.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150309041429/http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2014/2014onsc5140/2014onsc5140.html to http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2014/2014onsc5140/2014onsc5140.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:43, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Canadian Firearms Registry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060709084728/http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=7f744959-cd1a-4746-af84-53957b01a6a0 to http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=7f744959-cd1a-4746-af84-53957b01a6a0
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110104165438/http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/facts-faits/index-eng.htm to http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/facts-faits/index-eng.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:33, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Where can I call to get another copy if it ?? 170.203.222.31 (talk) 16:56, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replacing my lost  gun registry certificate 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/timeline-the-gun-registry-debate-1.786548. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me!  18:03, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed