I have many people that are opposed to the registry, included in Canada’s Firearms Act, telling me that I’m incorrect in the assertions I’ve made about it. I keep being told that I’m confusing my facts. In reality, those telling me I’m confused may want to reassess their own comprehension of the Firearms Act, and specifically the correlation between the licensing system and the registry.
I’ve studied the Canadian Firearms Act in depth, and understand that screening is done when an individual applies for a license to acquire a firearm. I also understand that an individual has to register each new firearm they acquire.
When someone with a license registers their newly acquired firearm, it’s entered into the registry database, making it easier for police to track. The police use the registry before responding to calls in order to determine how many firearms, if any, are in the home they’re responding to. This offers police officers on the frontline an added layer of protection.
In addition, as it is the law to register newly acquired firearms, if concerns arise through the screening process or as a result of individuals like Dr. Kane reporting their worries to the police, an investigation may be triggered, registration may be denied, and firearms may be confiscated.
By eliminating the long-gun registry, the registry system would be incomplete, and thus, ineffective. In addition, the added layer of protection provided to police officers would disappear, as would the protection provided to women and children.
I have not confused the two; the registry and licensing systems are interrelated.
Tags: Canada's Firearms Act, Disarming Domestic Violence Campaign, domestic violence, gun control, IANSA, police protection
Dear Ms Mandelman,
I’m afraid that you do not fully understand the difference between the firearms licence and the firearms registry.
The RCMP cross checks firearms licence data with CPIC data every day. If a person with a firearms licence becomes involved with the police in a domestic situation, or an impaired driving situation, or any situation that may suggest a potentially dangerous change in psychological behaviour, the firearms information centre is informed.
The firearms registry has absolutely nothing to do with this. Moreover, front-line police do not trust the registry. Entry errors make the registry unreliable. Well-trained police always assume weapons are present whenever approaching any vehicle or structure.
In fact, in a recent poll of front line Canadian police officers, as of June 25, 2009, over 1432 wanted the registry scrapped while about 101 wanted the registry to continue.
That huge number of registry checks is possible only because the computer is rigged to perform a CFRO check on every check. Police do not bother to access the registry voluntarily because it is so inaccurate. Interestingly, the company responsible for the computer database gives contributions to the CPAC, which, it turn, runs press releases praising the registry. Their integrity officer recently resigned.
As a taxpayer, I continue to be appalled at the tactics used by vested interests to keep this useless and expensive registry alive.
You may need to study the firearms act yet again.. (without the blinders).. Maybe you should sit down with someone who is subject to these laws and talk to them and get your information first hand rather then reading a bunch of hyperbole and rhetoric and passing it off as fact..
Any time you want to come to the range or even just talk about the firearms act and firearms in general feel free to contact me.. If your not local I’m sure I can find someone who is…
So to correct you inaccuracies…
A legally imported firearm is registered as it enters Canada not as it is acquired by an individual. Be it as it physically crosses the border or when it is taken out of bond by the company importing them..
So, when I buy a rifle or revolver it is already in the registry.. A registry is like a catalog.. all it does is list the items that are in the country and in the case of restricted firearms where it is being stored…If I sell that it it’s not entered again the information is changed around…
When I buy a pistol the registry folks check to see if I have a license in the right class and either pass the information along, approve it or reject it…
I’m not sure what you think happens to a gun once it’s registered but putting a piece of paper beside it doesn’t make a lot of difference…
Any policeman will tell you that the registry cannot be trusted since a gang banger will not have registered his guns any stop, or entry needs to be treated like there could be a gun present..
Eliminating the registry would not make the information incomplete.. They are 2 different sets of information…We are not suggesting doing away with Licensing..
Registration leads to confiscation it’s not just buzzwords it has happened in Canada. The registry has been hacked and as a result it’s a shopping list for criminals..
My License says where I live, ergo where my guns are stored . if it’s important that police know where they are do, Without the registry..
If anyone believes that someone is a risk.. Call 1-800-731-4000 and lodge a safety concern..
It’s just as easy to call 911 or your local police..
Ms. Mandelman, do you honestly believe that front-line officers actually trust the registry? Do you think that after a registry query indicates no firearms at a given address, SOP calls for them to exhibit less caution?
To do so would be foolhardy, given that criminals don’t register their firearms. Registered firearms owners are the most law-abiding people in the country. If anything, the LEO’s who do use and trust the registry should be glad that a “positive hit” showed an upstanding citizen residing at the address in question….
In the latest scenario, the registry tells the police what to confiscate when a license is revoked. Please site the number of instances where this provision has been invoked, without the use of a companion search warrant, which would locate any firearms in the residence in any case.
The limited usefulness of the registry, in this example, is redundant. If a complaint is leveled against an individual, and a subsequent investigation suggests lawfully owned firearms should be removed from that individual’s possession, a search warrant is executed in any case.
If the only justification for the firearms registry, with it’s gross mismanagement and billion dollar cost overruns is that it provides a mechanism for police to identify firearms that will ultimately be found via a search warrant regardless, how can the inconvenience of millions of non-crazy Canadian firearms owners be justified? Or perhaps you dont care, because you don’t own firearms.
Perhaps we should institute a kitchen knife registry. Then, when you realize that the issue affects you directly, your tone will change. For now however, its not your property you suggest be denied, so who cares…right? If it saves one life….
Billions of dollars to create a redundant paper trail which is neither accurate nor effective towards it’s purpose? How can this be defended by any person, regardless of your opinion on private ownership of firearms? Even if you absolutely deny any reason for any person to possess firearms, how can you justify a billion dollar program which doesn’t work?
Front line officers that trust the registry are given a false sense of security. The registry is so flawed that it cannot be used in court yet the onus of registration is placed on the firearms owner.
You may had read the act, but we live it.
The reality is simple
The single largest protest in Canadian history was in opposition to Bill-C68 to which Alan Rock started. “if it saves one life its worth it”. I’m still waiting for the payback on the investment did we save 1 life yet or should I wait for the cost recovery program when the 2 Million firearms owners in Canada will bear the brunt of fees to pay back the 2 Billion we didn’t want spent. What will it take 15 more years and 2 Billion + more.
The money wasted so far 2 Billion (2,000,000,000) could have easily put both CT and MRI machines in every hospitable in Canada which would have ultimately saved thousands more likely tens of thousands of lives much more then can be said for the registry. For 20 Million they could double both the research and treatment facilities at the Ottawa Cancer center, but no they have to beg people for donations, fund raisers and lotto’s. Not only that but payoff to the individual tax payers would mean everyone would get a better share of the tax dollars spent. I don’t want to come of as callous, but the reality is more life could have been preserved with funding other projects. I feel sorry for people in abusive relationships, but I fail to see what that has to do with me or why in this twisted world my rights get limited because of other peoples problems. It could have also been used to help with programs for at risk youth and women as thousands are turned away weekly from shelters, but I guess an ineffective registry with great optics in relation to public safety that tracks inanimate objects is more important then real solutions to real problems. I blame idealistic people like yourself every time a person is unable to legally defend themselves and wasting money in the name of safety that could have been spend actually doing something with tangible results.
You see the root of the problem is very simple. Groups with Gun Control as there agenda such as IANSA will never stop ever until there impossible goal of no firearms in the hands of civilians is complete. And if successful it will be done on the back of honest citizens with a swat of destruction to property rights and civil liberties . The genie can never go back in the bottle firearms cannot be un-invented. The end effect is honest law abiding citizens comply with the laws and those that don’t become criminals and even then the real criminals will not comply anyways so the net effect is a ideal environment for criminals as we see in the UK right now there firearms laws have made them #1 in Europe in violent crime. Unfortunately Canadian gun owners where unorganized and realized this much too late and we got caught trusting the government at least we caught it before the British or even Australians. The first step is licensing and regulations. The second step is registry this key for them because without it they cannot move onto the next logical step of central storage. Also during this process the attempt to ban as many different types of firearms as possible will be attempted. During this whole process both access and availability to firearms will be limited at each step until finally it is such a task for a person to own or use firearms they simply give up. At this point the number of people left can easily be dismissed by the government and all of our final rights will be quashed with little to no uproar.
The whole process depends on “Stigmatizing” actions of people and governments seen to be contributing to the problem where the problem can be as simple as a person that believes in there rights to own firearms. They will do and say anything even roll out “victims” and grieving mothers, but completely ignore all the lives actually saved by firearms. Emotion and out of context statistics is there weapon never do you see peer reviewed or even sourced statistics. They have been extremely effective at spreading fear and “Stigmatizing” normal everyday honest law abiding citizens. That is how people like yourself play this very serious game that involves my rights and the rights of every Canadian and the reason why people such as myself will fight you for every inch. What sickens me the most is you’re an American promoting laws that would have my liberty quashed.
The opposite has and is happening in Canada at a grass roots level every time this topic heats up more people join. Even in very rare cases we have started to see positive media reports. I came out of the closet a few years back and a number of people that had known me for years where surprised I owned firearms especially since I am not a hunter also many of them didn’t even know handguns where legal in Canada. For a long time due to the media and the political incorrectness of my hobby I hide and that was a mistake I regret as I am the perfect example of a law abiding firearms owner.
Thanks,
Paul
Paul, very well said. I took an oath to defend this country from threats both from outside Canada and from inside Canada. i see this series of mis-information, slander and, out right lies to be a threat to all Canadians because if they do get their way you can bet that they will be looking for a new “cause celeb” and next there will be a whole new class of Canadians who are a “threat” the peace of this country. next time they will be after your car, or your .
its sad to see such corruption rot this country. it is time to shore up the foundations of Canada. Guns are part of our cultural heritage. Please honor our diversity.
dean
Ms Mandelman, with all due respect, as you are not even a Canadian, your views on OUR Gun Laws are actually none of your concern.
Move along, nothing to see here.
The comment period for this entry is now closed.
Hello,
I found this blog through random research and cruising of the web regarding firearms in Canada. I AM a firearms owner, and actually SUPPORT the existing laws in Canada as they stand.
I think this area of law has been “maxed out” and only law abiding citizens are following it, in essence you can “squeeze” them to follow more laws but nothing of substance can really be gained. Any real efforts to improve public safety should be directed at why so many real criminals/gangsters are getting released from jail so easily. These repeat offenders escalate their crimes, as the more interaction they have with jail-the less they fear it. It quickly loses any deterence value. I have read the posts on the forum you were invited to, and take it upon myself to apologize for the really decent men and women who are members there. There is alot of frustration and you happened to be the relief valve. It was very good to join up to learn more from “the other side”. Perhaps you will come back some day for intelligent debate, once the malingerers are kept in check by the moderators.
I encourage you to seek out information from Professor Mauser, who is very well versed and qualified on this subject. I challenge you to actually try to go through the process and try to obtain your Possession and Aquisition Licence, purchase a restricted and non-restricted firearm and commence to join and use a range. The mountain of exams, storage laws, transport laws and safety laws must be experienced first hand to be appreciated. After the excerise, by all means sell your firearms back to the gun store should you wish to do so. I think you will realize how confusing all of this is, and how easy it is to become an unwitting “paper” criminal. There is a absolutely massive difference between a street gangster with a gun and an urban target competitor or farmer with a gun. Please don’t confuse “anti-gun” with “anti-GANG”. It is a subtle but serious difference. Many people lump it all together and just want to make society safer by banning things. Their heart is in the right place, but is misdirected. Guns have been in Canada for 300 years, believe it or not. Yes, 300. Urban street gangs are a relatively new occurence on city streets- that is the real root caus eof so much violence. Thanks for the space on your blog, please email for further details.