For a party that touts its record at being tough on crime and has done everything under its power to make life as miserable as possible for criminals, Conservatives seem to be talking out of both sides of their mouths when it comes to their dogged determination to abolish Canada’s long-gun registry.
Members of Parliament will vote on two pieces of legislation when they return from summer break next week — an amendment by the NDP to keep the registry with some modifications to remove parts of the registry’s more onerous conditions and a private members’ bill the Conservative minority government has embraced to completely repeal the registry.
When sitting as opposition (under a different party) when the registry was officially created in 2001, the Conservatives had good fiscal intentions in trying to scrap the registry altogether. Despite claims of being able to operate the registry for $2 million a year, an audit in 2002 revealed the registry would actually cost about $1 billion. Yet it is not its cost that drives Stephen Harper and his caucus any longer, as the registry now only costs a couple of million dollars each year. The battle has been boiled down to two common refrains — it is an assault on rural Canadians who own firearms and the registry does nothing to prevent gun crime.
Both arguments, fail to completely demonstrate why dismantling a firearms program with annually increasing enrolment is appropriate. Given the Conservatives have since repeatedly extended amnesties to individuals who have not registered their guns, there is no reason for any person not to. The registry does not exist to punish farmers who own guns to keep their livestock safe or northern aboriginal communities who use them to hunt for food — it exists to account for all of the long guns that currently circulate in Canada. Firearms legislation passed in 1977 requires registering restricted weapons such as handguns and assault weapons. No one seems to be in a hurry to repeal that provision.
Whether a gun is short or long, it doesn’t change the danger factor. The recent moves by Canada’s police chiefs and the Canadian Police Association to push for the registry’s survival stems from the fact police do use the registry on a daily basis. The search of any person’s name or driver’s licence brings up any related firearms information, especially important to police officers responding or deploying to a potentially violent scene.
The Conservatives continue to claim the gun registry does not prevent crime and that criminals do not register their guns. Yet what they seem to forget, especially in their efforts to curb violent crime, is that there are situations where both arguments are resoundingly false, especially when it comes to domestic violence. There are law-abiding citizens who register their guns, then turn around and beat their spouses or children. As many criminologists and veteran police officers know, that can be the first step towards a more gruesome outcome. Anyone convicted of assault can be subject to a firearms ban, which registration makes easier to enforce. Since 2005, there has been a 67 per cent decrease in the annual number of domestic homicides committed with a firearm.
Giving police the tools to keep the public safe is what the government should be concerned about, not the circular argument that the money spent on the registry could be used to hire more frontline officers. The Conservatives lost any moral responsibility to eliminate the gun registry back when it was cost-prohibitive. Now that it is integrated into Canada’s policing practices, the government would be better served to make it more accessible to gun owners than simply killing it altogether. The whole point is to keep Canadians safe and the registry is just one tool that can help do that. Hopefully the NDP MPs who originally supported the bill will continue to change their minds and embrace their leader’s alternative.
