To all,
The last time we were threatened by a Lic & Reg bill, 1673(?) ealier this year, it was our overwhelming letters and phone calls that helped them drop it. Two other things helped as well:
Sent the same letter to Gov Davis who does not want more gun leg - not yet anyway AND remind All of them the cost associated with such a system a la Canada. Below is a portion of my letter:
There are also the cost and compliance factors. I wonder if the Senate is aware of the cost associated with such a system. Has the Senate checked into the cost as it has skyrocketed in Canada? Have you checked the fact that two provinces are refusing to enforce the particular codes? Or that 20,000 Canadians thus far are refusing to comply?
http://www.lufa.ca
The Violence Policy Center even doubts the effectiveness of licensing and registration in reducing crime and is aware of the high cost.
http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/licreg.htm :
“…What are the limitations of licensing and registration?
Licensing systems are very expensive to administer. Canada's experience with its full licensing and registration system, begun in December 1998, is not encouraging. The government originally estimated that the cost of licensing Canada's three million gun owners and registering their seven million guns would be $185 million [Canadian] over five years including a one-time start-up cost of $85 million [Canadian]. But, by March 2000 the Canadian Firearms Centre admitted that the system had already cost Canadian taxpayers $327 million [Canadian] and was running up an annual bill nearly 10 times higher than the government's original forecast. The March announcement also revealed that although 270,000 valid licenses existed from the country's earlier gun control system, only 142,000 new licenses had been issued. Using these figures as a baseline for America's arsenal of 65 million handguns, the estimated cost of such a system here is staggering.
Most importantly, licensing and registration in America would have little effect on the vast majority of gun violence, such as unintentional gunshot deaths, suicides and the majority of homicides, since most homicides are the result of arguments between people who know each other and who purchase guns legally.
From a political perspective, a battle over licensing and registration brings every gun owner into the fray. The NRA argument that licensing and registration is the first step towards gun confiscation has always been very persuasive with gun owners. In contrast, health and safety regulation of the industry focuses on the conduct of firearm manufacturers.
Advocates of licensing and registration often cite automobiles as an example of the value of licensing and registration: we register automobiles and license drivers, so why not guns? However, licensing and registration—the primary purpose of which was to enforce a system of taxation—had virtually no effect on automobile death and injury. It was not until the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration was established in the 1960s, and changes were forced in automobile design and the driving environment, that decreases were seen.
Finally, licensing and registration ignores the public health approach to reducing gun violence and disregards the lessons of consumer product safety by focusing on the user, and not on the manufacturer and the product itself.
In conclusion, licensing and registration can serve only as a supplement to regulation. But it can never substitute for comprehensive health and safety regulation of the gun industry. “
Write ! Especially if your stuck with a Demo, but are in a Central Valley area. They are worried about loosing there especially bad right now.
madison
