criminals won't register their guns. It is only a hassle for the honest man.

 The opponents of the registry are always going on about how it doesn't make sense for a law abiding "real" hunter to have to register their guns and how bad guys steal the guns they use to commit the crimes and how the registry therefore can't lead the police to the criminal because his name isn't in the registry.  The fact is, however, that the existence of the registry now makes it possible to arrest those who are found to be carrying an unregistered long gun (and who by virtue of the arguments of those who propose dismantling the registry we know must have come by the gun illegally). 

With the registry in place, if a gun is found in the possession of someone during a search or a routine stop the registry can be checked and if the gun is not registered the possessor can be charged with a breach of the regulations and at the same time, or later, with possession of stolen goods and or theft when the gun is found to belong to someone else. 

Without the registry there is no guarantee that the "bad guy" will not simply be sent on his way if the gun he is carrying is not known to have been stolen.  The registry is therefore a very effective crime prevention tool.  It helps take stolen guns (and the thieves who stole them) out of circulation and it help take guns that were smuggled or otherwise improperly obtained and never registered out of circulation.  It provides a lever or tool for police to detain suspicious (not in the least because of the unregistered status of the guns they posess) carriers and possessors of guns to be detained and further investigated.  This is clear to police chiefs across the nation and this is why they have spoken loudly in favour of the registry.  I imagine also that the rightful gun owners property could and would be restored to them after the perpetrator/thief was convicted.

I'm happy that the Conservatives attempt to scuttle the registry has been stopped in its tracks.  They think that their wedge politics on this issue will bring them rural gains.  Certainly it will bring losses in the cities.  In addition, I think that it will also cause them losses among rural women who are more likely to be attracted by the law and order message but repelled by the seeming contradiction of their  law and order platform with their anti-registry rhetoric.  It is not a foregone conclusion that every rural person hunts or that every hunter's wife herself approves of hunting or even of unregistered and uncontrolled gun use.  I personally believe that the Conservatives will discover that they have "shot themselves in the foot" on this issue.