PUBLICATION:              Edmonton Journal

DATE:                         2004.05.21

EDITION:                    Final

SECTION:                  Opinion

PAGE:                         A18

SOURCE:                   The Edmonton Journal

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Liberals fire blanks at gun registry

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes to the federal gun registry announced Thursday by Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan will do little to address the fundamental flaws in the billion-dollar system.

Eliminating registration fees and setting a $25-million cap on annual costs to the government amounts to little more than tinkering with an exorbitant and ineffective package of gun regulation.

The registry was set up in 1995 in response to a 1989 shooting rampage by Marc Lepine at the University of Montreal that left 14 women dead.

Canada already had laws banning sawed-off shotguns or rifles, automatic weapons and handguns (with a few narrowly defined exceptions). But Ottawa's Lepine-inspired plan was to have every gun in Canada -- including rifles, shotguns and semi-automatics -- registered by July 1, 2003, at a total cost to taxpayers of $2 million. (Registration fees were supposed to cover the other $117 million of the registry's alleged $119-million budget.)

But the registry immediately met with opposition, especially in Western Canada. Thousands of responsible gun owners -- many of them hunters and farmers who own firearms for legitimate reasons -- refused to register their guns, seeing it as an intrusion on their privacy.

They argued that by forcing them to do so, the government was treating them like criminals while doing nothing to address the real problem: people who use guns to kill or commit violent crimes.

To make matters worse for Ottawa, the cost of the registry spiralled out of control.

By next year, the total cost of the program is expected to reach $1 billion -- a staggering cost overrun that ironically was incurred largely during the years McLellan was responsible for the registry as Justice minister.

In trying to impose a single solution on all Canadians, the federal government ignored an important fact: urban and rural residents have very different views on gun ownership and use.

In the cities, the presence of firearms usually means trouble and support for gun control often runs high.

But in rural areas, guns are used responsibly as tools for protecting livestock from predators or humanely putting down diseased animals.

The government has tried to appease both groups by extending the deadline for registering guns, refusing to enforce the new law and now by eliminating registration fees.

It's giving the appearance of doing something on gun control without really doing anything. The one bright spot in Thursday's announcement was a plan to increase penalties and enforcement for armed crimes.

Nevertheless, the registry has been of some use to police.

Late last year, for example, when Edmonton police were called to a northside condo where a man was holed up, they knew he owned a high-powered hunting rifle, a shotgun and a bolt-action .22 -- all of which had been registered.

Knowing that the man was heavily armed, police evacuated the neighbourhood and began an eight-hour standoff that ended with the man taking his own life.

But it's foolish to think the registry can prevent criminals from obtaining guns, or that it can prevent disturbed people from turning guns on themselves or others.

Since 1978, the federal government has required that all prospective gun owners obtain a firearms acquisition certificate before they can purchase or borrow a gun. To get a licence, applicants must indicate whether they have been treated for mental illness in the past five years and they must pass both a criminal record check and a firearms safety course.

Will Thursday's changes be enough to make people buy into the registry? Alberta Justice Minister Dave Hancock isn't convinced. He wants the registry scrapped or at least the Criminal Code changed so it's not a criminal offence to fail to register a firearm. "If they wanted to take even a small step, they could have taken the registry offences out of the Criminal Code," he rightly said. "They failed to do that."

Ottawa has also failed to account properly or take any action on the enormous cost overruns on the registry. The Martin government has promised to get to the bottom of the $250-million sponsorship scandal, which has become an election issue.

Yet it has said nothing about how, exactly, $1 billion has been spent on the gun registry.

The registry is unworkable in its current form. Unless the government can somehow convince farmers and hunters to comply, unless it provides more support for people with mental illnesses, unless it cracks down on criminals -- who are the dominant reason we need gun control -- the registry will be nothing more than a billion-dollar boondoggle.