CANADA: Gun registry battle rages

[GreenStormCloud]

http://www.lfpress.com/news/canada/2009/10/26/11523566-sun.html


OTTAWA -- A federal spending watchdog group is picking up arms in the brewing battle to kill the gun registry, but the pro-control side is fighting back.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is flooding its 60,000 supporters with letters today urging them to lobby MPs and party leaders to help abolish the 14-year-old gun registry. The debate is heating up before a scheduled Nov. 4 vote on private member's bill C-391 to repeal the registry.

CTF federal director Kevin Gaudet said fury remains strong among hunters, anglers and recreational gun groups across the country, who see the registry as an "unresolved festering sore." Others in urban centres hate it just as much for financial reasons.

[gorfle]

1. How much does it cost? How effective is it?

How much does it cost? What are the registry's stated goals? How effective is the registry at achieving those goals?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

2. I would like to know how many crimes it has solved

and what the total cost is. See what kind of value it is.

Likely, spending the money to put more cops on the beat would accomplish more than the registry.
Maybe even safety and educational programs too.

[GreenStormCloud]

3. I googled and found this: Hubris in the North: The Canadian Firearms Registry

By Gary A. Mauser (What a name for a guy writing about a gun registry.) faculty at Simon Fraser University at Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998898
Here is an abstract of his study. It is only three paragraphs so I will post it all.

The recent shootings at a Montreal school have reignited the controversy over the firearm registry and has prompted the Conservative government to review its earlier pledge to scrap the registry. This paper is a timely effort to evaluate the effectiveness of the 1995 firearm legislation that created the firearm registry. In 1995, the government assumed that, by controlling the availability of firearms, the registry would reduce total criminal violence, not just gun violence, suicide and domestic abuse. This legislation is fundamentally flawed because it relies upon public health research to justify its moralistic approach to firearms. Public health advocates have exaggerated the danger of citizens owning firearms through pseudoscientific research methods.

The firearm registry involves licensing firearm owners as well as registering firearms. Even though the registry was created by the 1995 legislation, it was not implemented until 1998. Since the registry, with its dual function of licensing owners and registering long arms, was first implemented, the total homicide rate has actually increased by 9%. Perhaps the most striking change is that gang-related homicides have increased substantially - almost doubling between 1998 and 2005. Despite the drop in firearm-related suicides since the registry began, an increase in suicides involving hanging has nearly cancelled out the drop in firearm suicides. No persuasive link has been found between the firearm registry and any of these changes.

In conclusion, no convincing empirical evidence can be found that the firearm program has improved public safety. Violent crime and suicide rates remain virtually unchanged despite the nearly unlimited annual budgets during the first seven years of the firearms registry. Notwithstanding an estimated C$ 2 billion cost to date, the firearms registry remains notably incomplete and has an error rate that remains embarrassingly high.

[GreenStormCloud]

4. Found this: Ten Myths Of The Long Gun Registry

http://www.cdnshootingsports.org/2006/08/ten_myths_of_longgun_registry.html

Myth #1: The Gun Registry is a valuable tool for the police and they access it 6,500 times per day.
False. The “6,500 hits” figure for the Canadian Firearms Registry On-Line (CFRO) is misleading per the Public Security Ministry’s website of May 17, 2006 (Ques. 18).
(Snip two paragraphs of good explanation of the problem. To save space, I have snipped out most of the explanations of each. Go to the site to read the entire thing.)

Myth #2: The registry provides police officers information on the presence of firearms when theyrespond to emergency calls
Maybe. The Firearms Registry only provides a list of the legal guns, the very guns an officer is leastlikely to be harmed by.

Myth #3: Firearms related deaths have been reduced due to the long gun registry.
False. Reduction in firearms deaths started in the mid 1970s, well prior to the introduction of the registry in 2003 (StatsCan) and mirrors a proportionally greater reduction experienced in the United States, where firearms laws are being loosened.

Myth #4: Police investigations are aided by the registry.
Doubtful. Information contained in the registry is incomplete and unreliable. Due to the inaccuracy of the information, it cannot be used as evidence in court and the government has yet to prove that it has been a contributing factor in any investigation. Another factor is the dismal compliance rate (estimated at only 50%) for licensing and registration which further renders the registry useless.


Myth #5: The registry protects women in violent domestic situations.
False. Registered long guns were used in (all) homicide only twice in 2003 (Public Security Ministry website), and a total of 9 times from 1997-2004 (Library of Parliament).


Myth #6: The registry helps track stolen guns and forces firearms owners to be more responsible instoring their firearms. Over 50% of firearms used in crime are stolen from gun owners
False. Past Department of Justice studies found that among homicides where details were available, 84%of the firearms used in the commission of the crimes are unregistered and 74.9% are illegal guns smuggled into Canada, not the 50% some claim.


Myth #7: The information on the registry database is secure and cannot be accessed by the criminal element.
False. There were 306 illegal breaches of the national police database documented between 1995 and2003, 121 of which are still unsolved. Many police investigators have publicly voiced their concerns that the gun registry has been breached and become a “shopping list” for thieves.


Myth #8: The money has already been spent to set up the registry. It is foolish to dismantle it now.
False. The gun registry is by no means complete. ... Based upon precedent, it will cost another billion dollars to complete the registry

Myth #9: Rifles and shotguns are the weapon of choice for criminals and are the most used firearms in crime.
False. Where firearms were used in a violent crime, 71.2% involved handguns (but it is estimated that over 1/3 involve replicas or air guns), only 9% involved rifles or shotguns (of which 2.1% were registered) and 6.5% involved sawed off-rifles or shotguns (already prohibited).


Myth #10: The recent deaths of 6 RCMP officers at the hands of criminals with rifles proves the needfor the long gun registry.
False. The registry’s monumental failure to prevent the tragic deaths of these police officers underscoresthe folly of registering the firearms of the law abiding. All the criminals who committed these crimes were in illegal possession of unregistered guns, despite the presence of the registry.

[GreenStormCloud]

5. Found this on the expense. Very damn expensive!!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/story/2004/02/13/gunregistry_rdi040213.html It is from 2004.

Canada's controversial gun registry is costing taxpayers far more than previously reported, CBC News has learned.
Nearly $2 billion has either been spent on or committed to the federal program since it was introduced in the mid-1990s, according to documents obtained by Zone Libre of CBC's French news service.

(Snip)

The gun registry was originally supposed to cost less than $2 million. In December 2002, Auditor General Sheila Fraser revealed that the program would run up bills of at least $1 billion by 2005.

(Snip)

A large part of the $2 billion expense is a computer system that's supposed to track registered guns, according to one document. Officials initially estimated it would cost about $1 million. Expenses now hover close to $750 million and the electronic system is still not fully operational.

[Katya Mullethov]

9. If those numbers are right

There's your smoking gun . Just a wee bit of an over run there fellas .

[GreenStormCloud]

12. It does seem to set a new standard for cost overruns.

Even our own Pentagon would blush at that much of an overrun.

[Katya Mullethov]

13. Wild beyond belief

Even a tiny fraction of that amount of money is reason enough for me to understand why such a registry MUST exist .

[slackmaster]

6. In Before Scoldilocks Shows Up To Lecture Us

:nuke:

[PavePusher]

7. After all...

If it weren't for all those uncontrolled firearms owners south of the Canadian border, there wouldn't be any Canadian crime problem...

Or whatever.

[oneshooter]

8. And neither would the UK or Australia!! N/T

[Euromutt]

10. And don't forget...

...that any Canadian politician who objects to the registry is by definition a) a filthy, stinking LIAR, and b) not from Ontario or the Maritimes and therefore not really Canadian, but just an American wannabe.

[rd_kent]

11. I wonder if we will hear from our resident Canadian anti-gun owner on this.

Most of us know who that is.....