PUBLICATION:
Edmonton Journal
DATE:
2003.09.05
EDITION:
Final
SECTION:
Opinion
PAGE:
A18
COLUMN:
Lorne Gunter
BYLINE:
Lorne Gunter
SOURCE:
The Edmonton Journal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gun
registry's usefulness exaggerated: You could auger fencepost holes with the
Star's variety of corkscrew logic
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The
Toronto Star is at it again.
In
its self-appointed role as the unofficial propaganda organ for the federal
Liberal government -- it was once nicknamed the Trudeau Star -- Canada's
largest-circulation daily newspaper thinks it has stumbled onto proof that the
national gun registry is an effective tool in combating crime.
Last
Sunday, the paper proclaimed "documents obtained by the Star," show
police across Canada "rely on the registry." According to the paper,
police make "between 13,000 to 15,000 queries to the registry" each
week.
It's
actually not police who are making these queries, unless you count staff of the
Canadian Firearms Centre itself as police. Or each province's chief firearms
bureaucrat. Or a host of other federal and provincial civil servants whose
queries to the registry are included in this total.
But
put these definitional problems with the Star's "scoop" aside for a
moment.
What
is the nature of these queries to the registry?
Are
"police" asking the registry's computers for clues on the whereabouts
of a suspected murderer, using details from his gun licence or registration
certificate?
Well,
no. The registry can't provide those details to police because the vast majority
of murders on the lam haven't registered their guns.
Are
"police" seeking information on armed robbery suspects, gang members
or mobsters? Not if they're smart, they aren't. The kind of criminals Canadians
were assured would be caught -- the scary, violent kind -- by this massive waste
of money and intrusion on privacy are precisely the kind least likely to comply
with registration.
Look,
if you are the type who will kill, deal drugs, join a gang or hold up a bank,
you're also likely to be the first to ignore pointless administrative edicts,
such as: Register your guns, please.
What
did the Star say "police" were asking of the registry? Mostly they
wanted "sworn affidavits on whether or not guns were legally
registered." They also tapped the registry for information "to obtain
search warrants, arrest warrants or as evidence to use in court cases to prove
that individuals were illegally in possession of a firearm."
The
Star also quoted an unnamed senior crown prosecutor in Ontario as claiming the
registry "is an important tool for us," because "it can tell us
whether someone has access to a lawfully registered weapon."
Perhaps
this sounds somewhat impressive and worthwhile. But look again at the crimes for
which the warrants are being issued and the evidence gathered: Is a gun
"legally registered," is an individual "illegally in possession
of a firearm," is the gun someone has access to "lawfully
registered?"
All
of these are crimes against the Liberals' registration laws. They are not crimes
against people or property, they are crimes against the Liberals' decree that
all guns shall be registered.
In
effect, the Star has uncovered proof that the registry is useful to
"police" in investigating crimes against the registry, but not real
crimes such as armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon or attempted murder.
In
the Star's world, the registry is useful because it is used a lot to check on
whether guns are registered. You could auger fencepost holes with that kind of
corkscrew logic.
Looking
at it in reverse, if guns didn't have to be registered, then police wouldn't
have to check on their registration status to determine whether their owners
were in violation of the law, because there would be no law for the owners to
violate.
Ottawa's
Firearms Act hasn't prevented crime, it has made criminals of ordinary gun
owners, and in the process generated lots of requests to the registry to check
on whether ordinary Canadians have become newly minted administrative criminals.
Talk about a self-fulfilling justification.
It
is also likely that very few of the 13,000 to 15,000 weekly inquires to the
registry come from real, frontline police officers on duty.
In
April, Saskatchewan Alliance MP Garry Breitkreuz filed an access to information
request with the Canadian Firearms Centre. The CFC claimed at the time that
since December 1998, when the registry commenced operations, 2.3 million
requests for information had been made by police "and other law enforcement
officials."
Breitkreuz
simply wanted to know how many of those 2.3 million inquires were made by police
officers and how many by bureaucrats who, in the performance of their
registration duties, are considered "law enforcement officials." In
June, the CFC replied that it could not break down its statistics by
police/non-police.
Perhaps
the only truly useful fact in the Star's story was its discovery that since the
beginning of 2003, Ontario police forces have accessed the registry 1,000 times.
At that rate, they have made about 5,000 information requests since 1998.
In
June, the CFC was able to tell Breitkreuz that during the registry's existence,
542,673 requests for info had been received from Ontario. The 5,000 or so by
police, would then account for just one per cent of the total.
The
"law enforcement officials" who make the most use of the registry are
likely the registry's own staff in Ottawa or the CFC's provincial offices.
That
hardly makes the registry a major instrument in fighting violent crime.