OP-ED: MP misguided in gun registry support
by Rob Leggett on 18 Nov 2009
On Nov.4, our MP, Alex Atamanenko, voted against Bill C-391, which would scrap the long gun registry, throwing his support behind what has become known as the “$2 billion boondoggle”.
Why would our MP vote in favour of keeping the colossal waste of money?
He states that, “I believe the registry may be working. Between 1991 and 2007, the murder rate of women by firearms dropped by 67-per-cent total and the murder rate by rifles and shotguns has declined by 76 per cent.”
While I do not believe that Atamanenko intentionally set out to give misleading information, he did not give the full truth. According to Statistics Canada, the overall rate of homicides committed with a firearm has gradually declined between the mid-1970s and 2002.
Since then, this rate has generally been increasing.
Of the 200 firearm homicides in 2008, 121 or (61 per cent) were committed with a handgun, 34 with a rifle/shotgun and 17 with a sawed-off rifle/shotgun. Over the past 30 years, the use of handguns to commit homicide has generally been increasing, while the use of rifles or shotguns has generally declined ... clearly showing that the homicide rate had been dropping 20 years prior to the long gun registry and that the only reason the murder rate by rifles and shotguns appears to be decreasing so significantly is because the use of handguns has been increasing.
It also appears that Atamanenko believes the exaggerations made about the reliance of law enforcement on the registry, knowing full well that every search of the Canadian Police Information Centre, for any reason generates an automatic search of the firearms registry.
As Simon Fraser University professor emeritus Gary Mauser confirmed, “While some police associations claim the registry works, it should be noted that these organizations are partially funded by groups that advocate greater gun control. Front line police officers do not trust the registry as an anti-crime tool.”
This sentiment was echoed by MP Candice Hoeppner in her first hour of debate for Second Reading, where she said, “In fact, 93 per cent of gun crimes in the last eight years have been committed with illegal guns and unregistered guns. That is a staggering statistic and one that flies in the face of any argument supporting the long gun registry. That is also why so many front-line police officers support ending the long gun registry. They recognize that this registry goes after the wrong group of people.”
As for the bureaucratic nightmare that gun owners face when they would have to register their guns, Atamanenko had this to say, “I didn’t find it to be any real hassle. It took me about half an hour to register my last one.”
But then he also said this, “There have been lots of examples in our riding where people have been hitting their heads against a stone wall and running into bureaucracy when they go to register. I see waste in the system and I see people getting frustrated.”
Which is it, are people getting frustrated by the bureaucracy or is it no real hassle?
Even though I would never want to believe that there is special treatment, and I am sure Atamanenko would never condone such treatment, but I would like to suggest that his registration may have been easier than most because the words 'Member of Parliament' accompany his name.
Atamanenko was also eager to point out that the Conservatives were withholding two reports in favour of the long gun registry, but at the same time neglected to mention that a legitimate fear of registered gun owners was realized; that in September 2009, the Canadian Firearms Center released gun owners’ names and addresses to a pollster for use in a survey, without their permission or the permission of the minister.
Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan has asked the federal privacy commissioner to investigate, saying, “Contrary to policy, the Ministry of Public Safety was not asked to approve the polling. The government expressly disapproves of what occurred.”
It goes without saying that the long gun registry is a dismal failure and I am grateful to see that it’s on its way to being thrown onto the pile of bad ideas. It hasn’t kept guns out of criminals’ hands as was promised; it hasn’t lowered the rate of firearm-related homicide as was promised, in fact, said homicide rates have been increasing since 2002 and the registry has cost billions more than was promised.
I can see this, millions of Canadians can see this… so why can’t our MP see this?
Other News Stories
-
Contributor
-
Kyra Hoggan
-
Kyra Hoggan
-
Kyra Hoggan
-
Rob Leggett
Comments
Convenience isn't the Issue
I have found the gun registry to be only a minor inconvenience. In fact, it makes it somewhat easier to take firearms into and out of the USA. But that is only one minor issue. If there was any real evidence that it was doing any good I would put up with a great deal more inconvenience.
There is always the argument against civil rights stating that if you have nothing to hide you shouldn't be afraid to allow the government to supervise any and every aspect of your life. Fortunately that isn't the way we have to live. I'm not prepared to debate why some aspects of a branch of government may want this information. I don't care. They have to show that in a free and democratic society such a restriction is reasonable and contributes to the common good. They haven't and can't because it is clear that the money wasted on this political boondoggle could well have been spent actually fighting crime rather than pandering to fearmongers in our society.
Perhaps registering our pocket knives or a garden tool like a machete or our kitchen knives could help save a life but creating a multi-million dollar registry to do so is not a sensible approach.
If those in Quebec want to keep the registry (which I doubt) I don't see any reason that they couldn't run a provincial registry. They operate many other programs on a provincial basis.
I respect Mr. Atamanenko's right to vote his conscience on a matter such as this just as I'm sure he respects my right not to vote for him in the next election because of our different perspectives.
registration
Registered two long guns without any more difficulty than buying auto insurance. The cost of program compared with benefits has to be of concern though.
The cursed long gun registry and our mp
I have consistently requested of Mr. Atamanenko to vote in favor of dismantelling the registry, wondering how an mp who was elected to bring the concerns of the majority of his constituents to Ottawa. I consistently get a response from him that he likes the registry, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of police like the registry and he is going to vote to keep it.
This raises a major concern to me, as Mr. Atamanenko seems more interested in representing his own agenda and that of a group of police chiefs who receive massive amounts of money from contractors who service the long gun registry.
I supported him once in an election, but have decided that come the next election I'll vote otherwise and let him depend on the Canadian Chiefs 0f Police Association to vote him in. After all, I'd rather have an mp who is prepared to vote for his constituents.
As an aside, the overwhelmingly largest majority of front line police officers have made it very clear that for them to depend on information from the long gun registry to keep them safe would be tatamount to suicide.
As a former peace officer I was told to always approach a situation with the assumption that weapons would be present. That approach kept me alive and safe until retirement.
Ask the REAL users of the registry.
Police Chiefs sit behind a desk. The Police Officers who patrol our streets and putting themselves in harms way everyday are the ones who will tell you how effective the registry really is. In fact, they've been trained specifically to NOT use the registry. Relying on it would only put them in danger.
I'm personally not worried about people with legally-owned firearms. They've shown that they respect the law and the people around them. What I'm concerned with is the source of over 95% of the gun crime taking place in Canada: Gangs. You know, the gang members with unregistered handguns smuggled in from the US with their serial numbers filed off? The ones who are robbing businesses and hard-working people? The ones who show absolutely no respect for the law and the people around them?
A gun registry of any sort has never stop a criminal from obtaining an illegal firearm, and has never stopped anyone from using even a legal firearm to harm people. Dawson College anyone?
The only thing the long-gun registry has done is diverted scarce funding away from real crime fighting programs. How many shootings could have been prevented if "high-risk" children, especially those living in poor neighbourhoods, had more after-school activities to participate in? If mentally-ill people could get the help they needed quicker? If womens' shelters had more resources? The long-gun registry is inadvertently putting people in danger, and it needs to go.
Want the real facts? Google it. Anyone with a computer and an internet connection can get the facts themselves by doing a web search on the gun registry, or on gun control for that matter.
To Bill Tieleman... The CACP is a lobby group...
There is one simple reason why the Canadian Association of Chief of Police are 'vocal' supporter of the Long Gun Registry...
Can you guess why?
MONEY, and lots of it!
In case you did not know, CGI (the computer firm doing the work on the gun registry) is a MAJOR financial contributor to CACP activities.
How 'bad' in the situation with CACP?
Bad enough that their ethic advisor resigned not so long ago because of all the 'sponsorship' money the association was getting in return of them supporting this or that product.
Long Gun Registry
I'd like to congratulate Mr. Leggett on a well crafted and ably written commentary. I sincerely wish his skills and artistry were used in support of a free and fair discussion on the subject of the long gun registry, as he seems to have a rare ability to present the facts from new and interesting angles of approach.
In a series of carefully crafted statements he is able to:
support a factually incorrect quotation about the cost of the registry(most of the cost he refers to involved the set up and operation of the licensing system, not the registry itself);
infer that registering long guns has driven murderers to select restricted handguns as their weapons of choice, (presumably because they would otherwise have had to register the rifle, whilst the revolver may be bought over the line and transported north with relative ease);
quote a professor emeritus as an intimate of front line police officers across the country, without mentioning that he is a spokesperson for the National Firearms Association;
quote a conservative MP who also thinks registering long guns has driven the criminal element to select handguns;
completely overlook the goverments refusal to release public information to the public (studies in support of the registry);
and infer that our own MP may have benefited from 'special treatment' at the hands of registry staff.
I would never, of course, infer or believe that Mr. Leggett has any other agenda than the one he presents, or that he is aware of the use made of the registry by mental health professionals and others who report they have accessed the registry and acted to ensure that guns are removed from the homes of people whose mental state makes easy access to firearms a dangerous and foolhardy proposition.
I know that each and every one of us, regardless of political persuasion would gladly suffer line-ups and wait times in the interests of saving another human life. One person's pain in the butt may well be the salvation of another person's family and friends.
Personally I am thankful for Mr. Atamanenko and all of the other MPs who share his integrity and his attention to the needs of all Canadians. I regret that we do not have more like him in Ottawa.
Sincerely,
Keith Simmonds
Please...check facts
I appreciate your comments and respect your opinion; however it was hard not to notice the disingenuous tone of your letter.
Normally I would refrain from getting into the debate, however if you wish to suggest that my facts are incorrect or I haven’t researched an issue fully I feel I need to correct this.
I would like to address your belief that I am not allowing a free and fair discussion on the registry, “I sincerely wish his skills and artistry were used in support of a free and fair discussion on the subject of the long gun registry”, I would have to suggest that this is exactly what is happening because of my column. You were able to freely post your free and fair opinion on this subject, even though you disagree with what I had to say.
Next you say that I was incorrect about the cost of the registry, “support a factually incorrect quotation about the cost of the registry” I would like to refer you to the facts supplied by the Ministry of Public Safety:
• In 1995, the previous government told Parliament that the firearms program, most specifically the long-gun registry, would involve a net cost of just $2 million (Auditor General's Report 2002, Chapter 10).
• In May 2000, the previous government admitted that the costs had actually ballooned to at least $327 million (Auditor General's Report 2002, Chapter 10).
• By March 2005 the net cost of the firearms program was $946 million and by summer of 2006, costs had exceeded $1 billion. The Auditor General stated that Parliament was misinformed about many of these costs. (Auditor General's Report 2006, Chapter 4).
• Neither the costs incurred by provincial and territorial agencies in enforcing the legislation, nor the costs borne by Firearms owners and businesses to comply with the legislation have been calculated. (Auditor General's Report 2002, Chapter 10).
• Two Library of Parliament studies estimate that the enforcement and compliance costs are substantial, running into hundreds of millions of dollars. (Compliance Costs of Firearms Registration, 10 October 2003; and, Estimates of Some of the Costs of Enforcing the Firearms Act, 20 March 2003).
Whether we agree with the registry or not the cost of keeping it has been growing exponentially since its inception.
You then go on to say “infer that registering long guns has driven murderers to select restricted handguns as their weapons of choice, (presumably because they would otherwise have had to register the rifle, whilst the revolver may be bought over the line and transported north with relative ease)” I never said that or even implied that what I did say was “the only reason the murder rate by rifles and shotguns appears to be decreasing so significantly is because the use of handguns has been increasing.” This is a fact! Handgun use has been on the rise for violent crimes while long gun use has stayed relatively stable, in other words the registry has done nothing to prevent gun use, and it only appears that long-gun use has gone down (which it hasn’t) because handguns are becoming more prevalent.
While, Gary Mauser is a spokesperson for the National Firearms Association, he is also an expert in this field. He was in both the Institute for Canadian Urban Research Studies in Criminology and the Faculty of Business Administration. He has researched and published in criminology for more than 15 years. His doctoral training was in social psychology and quantitative methods. And his academic research has been published in criminology, political science as well as business journals. He has also been invited to speak before the House of Commons, The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights for the Liberal government.
Also, you state that I “completely overlook the goverments refusal to release public information to the public”; I did not, as my column states “the Conservatives were withholding two reports in favour of the long gun registry”
And, “and infer that our own MP may have benefited from 'special treatment' at the hands of registry staff”, yep I did, but I also said “Even though I would never want to believe that there is special treatment, and I am sure Atamanenko would never condone such treatment”. I obviously will disagree with our MP about many issues, but I believe him to be a very honorable man. I don’t have to like the politics to respect the man.
As I said before, I don’t mind a difference in opinion and disagree with me all you like that is the pleasure of honest and open discourse, but please make sure you get your facts straight before correcting mine.
Rob
Reply to Mr. Leggett
Dear Mr. Leggett,
Thank you for clarifying your stance.
I did not seek to correct your facts, only to complete them. I believe they have a lot of completion yet to go. Worse yet, you have completely failed to address the use of the registry by mental health professionals.
I find your comments around Alex to be disingenuous. I believe any reader of discernment - whatever their political stance - would find your attempts to damn him with faint praise to be rather crude and heavy handed attacks on the character of a fine, decent and honourable human being. You do neither your cause nor yourself any credit. I think you should withdraw the remarks.
Sincerely,
Keith Simmonds
Why do police disagree with you?
There are many things wrong with this opinion Rob but let's just ask a couple of fundamental questions?
Why do police chiefs right across Canada want to keep the long gun registry?
Why does the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police argue strongly in favour of retaining it?
Why does the head of Montreal's police union - not a chief - also want it kept?
Yves Francouer asked: "We have to register our vehicles, we have to register our properties, we have to register our trailers and we shouldn't have to register our guns? It doesn't make any sense."
And lastly, why having spent a huge amount of money to create the registry - and I agree the federal Liberal government totally screwed it up - would we then waste that investment? Especially since ongoing annual costs are now less than $10 million?
Do you agree with the Conservative private members bill that the 8 million firearms registrations currently on file should be destroyed? Why?
Your MP Alex Atamanenko has the courage to ask these questions and vote his conscience - good for him.
Anyone interested in more arguments against killing the long gun registry should visit my blog at: http://billtieleman.blogspot.com/
I look forward to Rob's answers.