|
***********************************************************************
Professor Joseph Olson Hamline University School of Law tel. (651) 523-2142 St. Paul, Minnesota 55104-1284 fax. (651) 523-2236 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>>> Lorne Gunter [EMAIL PROTECTED]> 09/05/03 10:06AM >> EDMONTON JOURNAL
Gun registry's usefulness exaggerated: You
could auger fencepost holes with the Star's variety of corkscrew
logic
Friday 5 September 2003
p. A18
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. _______________________ Lorne Gunter Columnist, Edmonton Journal Editorial Board Member, National Post tele: (780) 916-0719 fax: (780) 481-4735 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 132 Quesnell Cres NW Edmonton AB T5R 5P2 |
