I strongly object to Stephen Harper's efforts to abolish the long gun registry.
As a responsible, law-abiding citizen, I was perfectly happy to register my firearms, just as I am perfectly happy to register my car. Why wouldn't I be? And yet from day one, certain factions have desperately tried to paint the long gun registry as an intolerable government intrusion into their lives, a trampling of their rights, and/or the prelude to some sort of totalitarian regime. Such notions sound more like the paranoid rantings of American militiamen than anything I would have imagined coming from the mouths of my fellow Canadians.
The fact is, Canadians do not have the right to bear arms. Never have. In this country, gun ownership is a privilege, and one that comes with profound responsibilities. We are required to undergo training to learn how to operate a firearm safely. We are required to store and transport our firearms securely in a locked safe or case. We are required to keep our licenses updated, and we are required to register our firearms so that a) they can be traced if stolen, and b) the police can have valuable information when entering into a volatile situation.
For a responsible gun owner, none of these things should be unreasonable or even particularly onerous. And in fact, I have met very few gun owners who particularly object to any of them. The ones who do seem to be those who own guns for very different reasons than I do. For me, a gun is a tool. A means to an end. For them, guns seem to have an emotional and symbolic resonance that I apparently fail to understand.
The biggest complaint about the registry is that it became incredibly expensive. What few seem to remember is that the original costing of the registry was based on having registration fees of (if I recall correctly) about $100 per gun. But some gun owners bitched and whined - mostly the ones who owned half a dozen firearms - and the fees were reduced. Then reduced again. Then eliminated altogether, leaving all taxpayers to foot the entire bill. That wasn't the entire reason for the cost overrun, but it was the most significant.
In addition, the efficacy of the long gun registry has been severely hampered by repeated amnesties. Resistant gun owners have been able to put off registering their firearms almost indefinitely as the government keeps the registry in political limbo. The result has been very spotty compliance and a total lack of enforcement, which in turn allows critics to condemn the registry as ineffective.
Instead of looking for ways to make the gun registry work in the way it was intended, successive governments have tried to dilute it or kill it by making concession after concession to those who claim to speak for all gun owners, hobbling the registry's effectiveness and in many ways making things more dangerous for the law enforcement officers it was designed to protect.
Those who view gun ownership as a right or as some sort of symbol of freedom or manhood do NOT speak for me, and I don't believe they speak for the majority of responsible gun owners. I therefore urge the government to commit to the long gun registry by a) re-instituting at least nominal registration fees to help cover administration costs, and b) ending the amnesty and instructing the Ministry and law enforcement to begin consistently enforcing compliance.
(forwarded to the Office of Lisa Raitt, Minister of Natural Resources)
"As a responsible, law-abiding citizen, I was perfectly happy to register my firearms, just as I am perfectly happy to register my car. Why wouldn't I be? And yet from day one, certain factions have desperately tried to paint the long gun registry as an intolerable government intrusion into their lives, a trampling of their rights, and/or the prelude to some sort of totalitarian regime. Such notions sound more like the paranoid rantings of American militiamen than anything I would have imagined coming from the mouths of my fellow Canadians."
ReplyDeleteAn opening volley. Good, someone who has conviction. Although, it's misguided. I don't have a great deal of time right now to engage you, but I will leave you, for now, with thoughts of this often heard criticism of Liberal oriented pontificates. When challenged, a member of the Liberal Party will resort to trying to diminish your argument by calling you names. i.e. Paranoid American Militiamen.
If you wish, you could refer to my blog for further thoughts on this subject, and we can go from there, in a respectful, Progressive manner.
I do not have that big a problem with a gun registry in theory but more with how it is sold as necessary to stop gun crime. What a load of bullocks, as has been pointed out immeasurable times no self respecting criminal, gang member, or under age youth is going to register their gun which was probably imported illegally from the U.S. It is true that it does give police a handle on where stolen guns come from and the ability to know in advance when visiting a citizens house if the own a weapon, I am not at all sure how useful or open to abuse that ability is! That the registry database was a total CF from word go does not help the debate at all, I have read where the cattle registry keeps track of many more “items” that change more frequently more efficiently and at far less cost.
ReplyDeleteI do indeed think that all handguns must be strictly controlled and tracked even though they are but a miniscule part of the crime problem, the long guns should indeed be tracked upon change of ownership or purchase, if that has not been done for years then what was the point of the FAC permit?
Register your long gun fine, but don’t tell me it’s a crime prevention issue!
And as for Iggy telling the Senate how to vote on this issue…. Who does he think he is, Harper!
Comrade -
ReplyDeleteTo start with, please keep in mind that I did say "certain factions" and not ALL people opposed to the long gun registry. But if you still think that characterization is a bit unfair, you should know that every single gun owner I know who really wants the gun registry abolished always bases their arguments on the idea that this is just the first step to having their guns confiscated, and that the next thing you know they won't have the ability to lead an armed rebellion against an oppressive government.
Seriously. All of them. Every time. Just like this guy. This line of reasoning, if I'm not mistaken, is precisely the rationale used by American Militiamen. Whether that makes them paranoid or not I suppose depends on your perspective, but I stand behind my sweeping generalization.
That said, I'm sure that there are perfectly rational people out there who have perfectly rational arguments against the long gun registry, but they tend to be much quieter. And most of them don't actually own guns.
Rural -
ReplyDeleteI don't remember the long gun registry ever being 'sold' as a way to specifically stop gun crime by those who set it up. As I recall, it was always presented as a) a logical extension of the handgun registry, and b) a tool for police.
It's really the Conservatives, the gun lobby and the other usual suspects who have tried paint this as a doomed anti-crime measure aimed at non-criminals. They've also done their utmost to frame the debate as an urban/rural culture war. Which is a real shame, because while handgun crime is a largely urban problem, incidents involving long guns - predominantly domestic crimes and suicides - are pretty much the same all over.
John Geddes has a pretty good article about exactly how the police use the registry and why they find it useful. And Frances Russell has a piece on why the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, the RCMP and T.O police chief Bill Blair all want to keep the registry.
For me, that's the best argument in its favour. That, and the fact that Julian Fantino hates it :) There's also this from the end of her article:
According to the RCMP's Canadian firearms program, long guns are the most common type of firearm used in spousal homicide. But gun registration appears to be working. Between 1991 and 2007, the murder rate of women by firearms dropped by 67 per cent, the total murder rate by rifles and shotguns declined by 76 per cent and total firearms death in Canada decreased by 51 per cent.
"They've also done their utmost to frame the debate as an urban/rural culture war. "
ReplyDeleteThat's because to a large extent it is. The long gun registry is flawed, fatally so.