Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

An important, cost-effective outrage

by Aaron Wherry on Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:45pm - 0 Comments

CBC gets hold of the RCMP report the government doesn’t think you need to see.

One section of the report states: “The program, as a whole, is an important tool for law enforcement. It also serves to increase accountability of firearm owners for their firearms.”

The report found that the cost of the program is in the range of $1.1 million to $3.6 million per year and that the Canadian Firearms Program is operating efficiently. “Overall the program is cost effective in reducing firearms related crime and promoting public safety through universal licensing of firearm owners and registration of firearms,” the report states.

Tags: firearms, gun control, gun registry, long gun registry, RCMP

More by Aaron Wherry

Emily

Gosh, how did that happen?

Vic Toews can do his Yosemite Sam impersonation again.
PolJunkie

I was thinking that the House could demand that the govt turn over the documents but we all know how this one would end…
TedTylerEzro

So is the CBC releasing the entire document?

Anon 001

They don't have to. By Monday, the government will.

Kevin

Even now, there are people going over it with black markers.

Olaf

I've heard they're using paint rollers. It's a little something I like to call "being efficient".

WDM

Bought in 2009 under the home reno tax credit!

*high five*
Andrew (not PorC)

One would imagine they just have sheets of black stock to hand out.

MarionKl

That should be an interesting read.
Stewart_Smith

But you are forgetting, Harper totally nailed the dance thing.

Reverend_Blair

Mrs. Rev watched Harper dance and said, "He dances like you." That's never good.

gottabesaid

Wait a sec… just the other day, Vic Toews said that the registry is costing (wasting) BILLIONS of dollars, not millions… at $3.6 million a year, it won't cost a billion for at least 277 years…

Yeah, I know it did cost a billion dollars plus to set up… but the thing is up and running now. Seems to me, sacking it now would be a waste of all that money spent. Frankly, I really don't care if they scrap it or not… I realize there are lots of law-abiding gun owners who don't like it, and I respect the fact that they don't like it… but don't try to sell me on the fact that it's going to be significant money-saver. It's not. Especially when the government can come up with a billion-plus for a one-off like the G8-G20.

LaxAtlDfwYow

Wrong and misleading is working pretty well for the CPC.

The wasting billions line was quoted throughout the media without a single critical mention that I saw. It's just too easy to lie when the media blindly sucks it up and spits it out verbatim.
s_c_f

It easily costs billions if you count the money spent since its inception.

Let's suppose you wanted to summarize the cost of going to college. Would you count just one year, or would you count the total amount?
Curt

I might be missing something but:
200 employees work at the gun registry in Bathurst. At $40k /year the total payroll is $8,000,000 plus building, benefits heat light and power etc.
Something isn't adding up.
Just wondering…

Mike R

The quoted section seems to conflate the two issues of licensing of gun owners, with which few people have an issue, and registration of the individual guns, which is the core of the dispute. It is not clear from the section quoted if the effectiveness of the program relates to both elements, or each individually.

Jenn_

Why is that a problem, anyway? I've never understood why getting the license is okay, but not registering the vehicle, err, weapon. Is it because opponents fear they'll be laughed at with their choice–similar to buying a used Lada? Or will it expose hypocrisy–similar to buying a Hummer if you are Gore? Or does it make it harder to lie to yourself about how much money you are spending on this stuff–similar to Jay Leno and his garages full?

I mean, I get that people with arsenals don't want the government to know they've got an arsenal. That's why they have an arsenal! Yet I persist in assuming most people don't have one. Can you explain this to me please?

MarionKl

And while they are at it, I would like to know why it's such an outrage to ask a hunter to register their long gun, but it's ok to ask people who want to join a shooting club to register theirs.

Shouldn't the rules be the same for everybody?

Mike R

Perhaps its the distinction between "asking" and "demanding"?

Sigh

But we aren't "asked" to register our cars, our births, our marriages, our deaths, our dogs, etc.
MarionKl

Whichever word you wish to use, it currently applies to both categories of gun owners. If this bill passes, it will only apply to one.

Jenn_

Alas, I fear it will be nigh impossible to put that genie back in the bottle. As has been remarked upon, even I have learned the art of the snark.
tedbetts

We don't need no information
We just want your thoughts controlled
No dark sarcasm in the pressroom
Canadians leave them Cons alone
Hey! Canadians! Leave them Cons alone!
All in all it's just another brick in the wall.
All in all you're just another brick in the wall.

We don't need no information
We just want your thoughts controlled
No dark sarcasm in the pressroom
Canadians leave them Cons alone
Hey! Canadians! Leave them Cons alone!
All in all it's just another brick in the wall.
All in all you're just another brick in the wall.

[Voice of the PM in the background] "Wrong, Do it again!"
"If you don't vote fer us, you can't have any pudding. How can you
have any pudding if you don't vote fer us?"
"You! Yes, you across the floor (with the bushy eyebrows), stand still laddy!"

That was Part II. Wait until you hear Part III!

LaxAtlDfwYow

And all these years I thought Harper just played that one on the piano.

Thanks to Ted we know the truth… Harper is Roger Waters. His upcoming album: The Fire Wall
OntarioTown

reminds me of a very old song:

Games People Play

Oh the games people play now
Every night and every day now
Never meaning what they say now
Never saying what they mean

And they wile away the hours
In their ivory towers
Till they're covered up with flowers
In the back of a black limousine

Chorus
La-da da da da da da da
La-da da da da da de
Talking 'bout you and me
And the games people play
Mulletaur

Nicely done. I still miss Jack, though.

tedbetts

You know you are in trouble when they stop shouting at you and start laughing at you.

Amateur Hour

Truism of the day.

OntarioTown

Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.

~Adolph Hitler

Mike R

If the money has been wasted already, I agree scrapping the registry won't get it back. But it is not an argument in favour of keeping it that it "only" costs two or three million a year. That isn't much in terms of the entire government budget, but there is still some obligation to ensure that government money is actually spent on something useful. If there is an argument in favour of registering long guns it has to be based on more than "it doesn't cost that much anyway".

Oliver

Fair enough, but then the governement shouldn't try to hide the actual cost of it and saying it costs more than it actually does.
As far as effeciency goes, the police are the ones using it and they say it helps them a great deal. I'm not sure who else to look to to get a second opinion however.
gottabesaid

I agree… if the case can be made that it's ineffective, get rid of it (although the hidden RCMP report seems to suggest that it's money well spent). I won't lose any sleep either way. However, what I DON'T appreciate is being told that it's wasting billions of dollars when it's an exaggeration by a factor of 300 or so.

Mike R

I'm not sure anyone has said it's "wasting billions of dollars", although that may be implied. Certainly, like most information management systems, the initial build went vastly over-budget. That was a waste, although the gun registry is not unique in facing that reality of IT systems. Still, the question remains as to how effective it is. There have been a lot of shootings in the Lower Mainland of BC over the last few years. I'm not aware of any information that suggests the long gun registry had any impact on those incidents. Nor is it clear whether it has allowed the police to remove guns from those who are mentally distrubed orsuicidal (the latter being a far more common risk for firearms deaths). Any statistical information on the effectiveness of the registry in dealing with those issues would be useful.

Blacktop

Not a bit. The thousands of referrals to the registry (repeated again today) are a smoke screen. Every referral for a vehicle license, search of CPIC and so on is counted, even if the case has nothing to do with weapons. The excuse that the police should know if a house being seearched has weapons is also crap. Any policeman worth his salt always assumes the worst and doesn't need a registry to tell him.
How do the chiefs react to the fact that over a thousand 400 ordinary policemen see the registry as not required. By denial, getting together. Obviously the Chiefs are more political. Either that or there are grants involved.
gottabesaid

Yeah, they said it.

“Canadians don’t need another report to know that the long-gun registry is very efficient at harassing law-abiding farmers and outdoors enthusiasts, while wasting billions of taxpayer dollars,” a spokesperson for Public Safety Minister Vic Toews told the Star Tuesday.

This is the kind of stuff that's getting on my nerves.
Reverend_Blair

It gets on my nerves too. I know a fair number of those responsible farmers and hunters. The gun safety tends to degrade with the level of rye in the bottle in some cases…a lot of cases…and how John Wayne-ish the guy with the gun wants to appear. Nobody in opposition wants to say it, there not being a lot of votes in calling people drunken rednecks, but these are my people.

The one thing the registry has accomplished, including among those who refuse to register their weapons, is to create a little bit more caution.
Mike R

And what effect does it have on those who have registered them?
Reverend_Blair

Same thing. A little more responsibility taken, a little more thought, a little less carelessness.

It's not the point of the registry, but it is something I've noticed…call it a side effect.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Ottawa_Centrist Ottawa_Centrist

Slingmonger.
Mike R

I'm not convinced its a huge issue – but it does seem that asking people who have already gone through the hoops of obtaining an FAC to then have to give the government a list of their firearms is not necessarily a useful or necessary thing. Just because the government can do something doesn't mean it has the need to do it.

But, as I said, it is not clear from the article if the RCMP find the registry itself useful, or the entire regulatory system. No one is suggesting the FAC process be eliminated, or the registry on restricted weapons. Just the listing of shotguns and hunting rifles.

gottabesaid

Certainly, the licensing process (in theory) keeps guns (any guns) out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. From that standpoint, the registration seems somewhat redundant. That said, obviously the RCMP think the registry is a worthwhile thing, and I'd like to see why. Too bad we can't see the report.

ChrisInKW

Who can own/possess a firearm == FAC/PAL
Who is the owner of the gun and where is it == CFP

Who can own/drive a car == driver's licence
Who is the owner of the car and where is it == auto registry

Mike R

Does the "auto registry" say where a car is located? I wasn't aware of that. Licensing a vehicle makes sense, since it allows an easy way to relate ownership to insurance and liability in the case of accidents and breaches of the motor vehicle act. I'm not sure that is an exact parallel to the use of the registry for firearms. Certainly the arguments in favour of the registry seem to be different. But anyway, registering of cars has been a long-standing and clearly useful tool of regulation. The firearms registry was invented in order for the government of the day to be seen to be doing something – and arguments in its favour are generally of the "we've spent the money so let's keep it" variety. They aren't compelling. But perhas the RCMP analysis will be more convincing.

Jenn_

Now this is a good discussion!

The auto registry says where a vehicle's "home" is, and also its home province. It can't tell where that vehicle might be at any moment of any day, of course. And I would think "liability in the case of accidents and breaches of the [. . .] act" would be at least as relevant with a firearm as it is with a vehicle. I would like to see some statistics with regard to accidents/intentional harm caused to people by long-guns. I'd further like to see some statistics on how many of those, if any, were unsolved/liability not ascertained. There may be no compelling reason for the registry for long guns. But maybe there is.
Oliver

I'm not sure I follow.
You say it makes sense to register a vehicle because of a special law taylored for it (the motor vehicle act) but it doesn't work the same way for guns? I don't know about insurance but I do think registering the gun would help in terms of determining liability when a firearm is in play during an accident.
And the historical argument doesn't seem to add much: cars and guns don't have the same history or accesibility issues. I don't think that saying that it's alright for cars because it's based on tradition and not ok for guns because it's based on a horrific shootout and isn't as old.
Mike R

Liability for cars follows the owner, no matter who drives it. I suppose if the law develops that way, so that gun ownership requires insurance that follows each individual gun it would be a parallel. But the utility of having car registry is obvious – and given the visibility of cars it is also pretty easy to enforce. The question about the registry of long guns has generally centred on whether it actually accomplishes anything, other than create the illusion of safety. Certainly there are a large number of unregistered firearms being used by criminals and there seems little way to eliminate that fact. If the registry doesn't deter criminal conduct, what is its purpose?
Oliver

Alright.
I don't really think the objective of the gun registry is safety: it's a tool to help police forces keep track of guns. It's not a game changer or anything of the sort: it's a useful tool, that's how I see it.
Say the police gets a call about a robery going on, but since the owner of the home has registered his guns the police is now aware that the robber might have access to fire arms. That's the kind of situation that I think the registry is helpful, not in preventing some lunatic from shooting up a public place: nothing can stop that.
Mike R

It has certainly been sold as a safety issue. I agree it is unlikely to help in that regard, unless the intent was to pro-actively take registered weapons away from those who have become mentally diesturbed or suicidal. I'm not sure it is being used in that regard.
If there is a call about a robbery the police may know there are firearms there if the registry says so, but it will not be a guarantee they are not there – since there are a lot of unregistered weapons. I'm not convinced of the utility of a list that is admittedly so incomplete. Does it often happen that the police respond to ongoing robberies involving the theft of firearms?
MarionKl

Re: removing weapons from people who are suicidal: I believe it actually is used in that way, as long as the person comes in contact with medical practitioners or law enforcement before they do something stupid.

Also, having your weapons registered makes it easier for them to be returned to you in case they *are* stolen. And I think it also makes people more careful in regards to who they let handle their weapons (the same way as they are careful about who can drive their car).

The problem is that this issue has become so polarized, it's hard to have a good discussion about it (like we are now).

I am very curious about the RCMP report, because there's obviously something in it that the CPC doesn't want us to read.
Reverend_Blair

There's also the paper trail. Without the registry, somebody gets pulled over with a gun in the car, and as long as they (or somebody in the car) has an FAC/PAL, there's nothing the cops can do about it. With the registry, the cops can check to see if they own the gun. Given the number of stolen firearms out there, that's important.

There's also the additional charges. If the cops suspect somebody was involved in a shooting, they may not have the evidence right away. If there's a breach of the registry law though, that's one more thing to hold the suspect on, and a valid reason to confiscate evidence before it can be destroyed.
Jenn_

Two good points I hadn't thought about.
Mike R

I'm not sure either is really a good enough reason to compel ordinary people to have to register their property. These seem pretty flimsy pretexts for the law. If those are the only reasons it does seem the money could be spent better elsewhere, on, for example mental health, gun safety courses etc.
Gayle

When motor vehicle does a hit and run, or when a civilian spots a suspected drunk driver and calls it in, or when a crime is committed and the offender gets away in a car, the easiest and best way of tracking the offender is through the licence plate number. Works the same way when a car is stolen.

When someone uses a gun in a crime, and the police find the gun, they can track it back to its owner in the same way. Kind of how they did it in the Mayerthorpe murders.
Mike R

That would be helfpul. But how many guns used in crimes are registered? Virtually all automobiles will be, since they are visible. Most reports indicate the weapons used by gangsters etc. are not registered (most are prohibited anyway). So what percentage of the cases involving crime involve registere long guns? It seems a marginal justification for the registry at first glance, but perhaps the RCMP study elaborates on the issue.
Gayle

Cheliak said 40% of guns found at crime scenes are registered.

http://www.globalwinnipeg.com/world/RCMP+official…
Reverend_Blair

It gets higher in rural areas too…not necessarily them being registered, since many people refused to do that, but the use of otherwise legal long guns that have been stolen. In a lot of cases the thefts have gone unnoticed or not been reported (that old rifle from the basement etc.)

It's funny…I don't hear the Conservatives talking about this kind of unreported crime, but I've heard of it happening.
Jenn_

And if you had to register the gun, you'd know that not reporting it stolen could very possibly get you into hot water down the road. So, you'd be more likely to report the theft. And then you might think that leaving a gun just lying around somewhere maybe isn't the most prudent thing to do. So, just generally encouraging more thought regarding safety on the part of gun owners.

Greg

We don't need more facts contradicting our beliefs.

s_c_f

Yes, facts! Let's look for the facts, shall we?

The auditor general's report also found that there is a lack of evidence to support the effectiveness of the gun registry, or to prove that it is meeting its stated goal of improving public safety.

s_c_f

Let's refer this to an independent source, like the Auditor General:
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=7…

The auditor general's report also found that there is a lack of evidence to support the effectiveness of the gun registry, or to prove that it is meeting its stated goal of improving public safety.

"The performance report focuses on activities such as issuing licences and registering firearms. The Centre does not show how these activities help minimize risks to public safety with evidence-based outcomes such as reduced deaths, injuries and threats from firearms," the report said.

Gayle

Well there's the big irony in all of this. When Harper came in, he turned the gun registry over to the RCMP, and it went from a mess to a success.

If Harper had any sense he would be patting himself on the back for that, because he really does deserve credit for that decision.

ColdStanding

Is the long gun registry fight a safety issue?
The RCMP seems to think so, as they claim to like it as a tool for threat assesment when entering a potentially dangerous law enforcement encounter. But it isn't really a safety issue because registering a fire arm doesn't reduce the risk that it will be used nefariously. Or if it does then it doesn't do so nearly as efficiently as a wide spread safety, training, and secure stowage campaign would have; at a fraction of the cost.

Curt

Suppose its raining out and they pull up to a residence with a registered gun. And further suppose the resident comes out with an umbrella in his hand. Does this make it OK to shoot the resident because of of a mistake.
It happened.

ColdStanding

I will further your further and suppose that you really arn't looking for answers to your questions, because you already know the answers.

I will say that as a tool of risk management, the funds poured into the LGR would have been better spent elsewhere, but I was on the wrong side of that vote, so it is sour grapes for me.

But my point isn't about the LGR.

ColdStanding

If it isn't a safety issue, and the long gun registry is an inefficient means of decreasing the risk to HRM's Canadian subjects, then is it a wasteful expendature issue? The price-tag was high in it's start up, no doubt and wasteful it would seem, but it was fully authorized by the government of the time, and that money is now spent. Wasteful, maybe, but gone for sure. If the current up keep of the system is now minimal, well, would it not be more wasteful to trash the whole thing? I say yes. Which would lead me to believe that the CPC isn't per se against wasteful government activities. Therefore, it isn't really a wasteful government expenditure issue.
ColdStanding

If it isn't safety, and it isn't wasteful expenditure, then maybe it is a base issue (as in the majority of those opposed live in the country or make frequent forays to the country and also tend to vote CPC). The base doesn't like the goverment… no, a more accurate reading would be that the people, who's favour the CPC is attempting to curry, tend not to like other people using the levers of government to, as they see it, foist liberal mores upon them. But the fact of the matter is that the people that own long guns have already accepted all kinds of government regulation in practically every other area of their life, (and fire arms to boot) to questionable benefit maybe, but it has been accepted never the less. Long gun owners as a whole are very responsable subjects of the crown. Unfortunately, when it comes to guns, owners have to be extremely responsable subjects, and the evidence is clear that a sufficient minority of owners have not exercised due care in handling and stowage, as guns have been stolen and used in crimes.
ColdStanding

No, this issue is much more simple than all of the above. This is about making Harper look bad. More specifically, this is about one group of people trying to rest the reigns of government from another.

This is about trying to make Harper look like a meanie, a bully, a mini-dictator. It is about attempting to discredit the current government so that the people will, by default, vote in the opposition. I get that this is how the game of politics can be played… but that isn't really good enough, for me.
What happened to coming up with a good plan, and presenting it?
If this is what politics has come to, then both ideologies have failed. One group, while in government can't govern, the other can't come up with enough reason to be allowed to govern. God only knows what green monster will step into the void.