RCMP posts review of Canadian Firearms Program on its Web site

If you're feeling confused about the public debate over the long-gun registry, you're not alone.

Conservative politicians have claimed it's a waste of money.

Police chiefs across the country say it's a necessary and not-very-expensive component of public-safety programs.

Today (August 31), the RCMP posted its evaluation of the Canadian Firearms Program on its Web site.

You can read it here and draw your own conclusions.

Comments (9) Add New Comment
Its a Gun Down .
Have the Conservatives turning their backs on the law? Stranger things have happened but the Conservatives have no worry because the RCMP dosen't have the budget to make government accountable for its many wrongs. At first it seemed rather weird the party spouting getting tough on crime and the billions party has mandated to lock up Canadians in private jails as crime is reportedly down while violence to women is up.
So what violence to women isn't a crime might very well explain why so much violence is taking place. Any room in those cells for guys who beat their women have to death?
2
2
Rating: 0
glen p robbins
Okay - let me start with a couple of interesting aspects taken from the first section in no particular order. First, bear in mind that the Commissioner for the RCMP oversees the Canada Firearms Program-

There are 6.5 million long guns (at issue now for registration) which are currently licensed but not registered and 500,000 hand guns which must be registered.

Direct costs for the Canada Firearms Program (1995-1996) - (2006-2007) for the Program itself is 726 million. Cost of the RCMP is 117 million-------now this is crucial - cost for Canada Border Services Agency is 22.5 million.

Bill C-68 of the Firearms Act "took most administrative and most regulatory aspects of firearm control out of the criminal code" -- "In May 2006 -- the Federal Government transferred responsibility and administrtion of the Firearms' Act -- to the RCMP

Let's take that snapshot and jump to the legal Reference Re: Firearms Act from the Supreme Court of Canada:

"This brings it under the federal criminal law power. While the law has regulatory aspects, they are SECONDARY to its criminal law purpose."

"Guns cannot be divided neatly into two categories - those that are dangerous and those that are not dangerous. All guns are capable of being used in crime. All guns are capable of killing and maiming. It follows that all guns are a threat to public safety. As such their control falls within the criminal law power ----- (pretty thin) but this last piece is important -- then go back and review direct costs-----"

"The (gun) registration scheme is also intended to reduce smuggling and the illegal trade of guns. These interconnections demonstrate that the registration and licensing portion of the Firearms Act are both tightly linked to Parliament's goal in promoting safety by reducing the misuse of any and all firearms. Both portions are integral and necessary to the operation of the scheme."

Pretty flimsy inconsistent stuff so far to predicate a 2 billion investment/so far looks more like politics than public safety -- more later

gpr

2
3
Rating: -1
beelzebub
"The scope of the evaluation was limited to direct costs incurred by the CFP and RCMP partners in the administration of the CFP .... The evaluation covers the key evaluation issues of relevance, success, cost effectiveness and implementation of the CFP."

In other words a justification of money spent. I want the NUMBERS of lives saved, investigations completed as a result of the CFP, criminals behind bars because of the CFP, gun smugglers apprehended, gangs arrested because of the CFP, etc. What do I get? One instance in Quebec where they say the officer would not have been killed if the squad had done the "right query" on the CFP. BS

Real numbers, not a 148 pages of fluff, justification, ideology, and how many times it was used. What is its EFFECTIVENESS in fighting gun crime by criminals using illegal guns?? NADA
1
2
Rating: -1
Migzy
I, too am appalled at the initial cost of setting this program up, but that money has already been spent so what we need to look at now is the ongoing cost vs benefits.

Also, since we have to register and license our cars, what is so wrong with having to register guns in our possession? That said, I do agree some changes need to made to the program, such as making it easy to register your firearms and cheap or free for them to be registered. We need to make it as easy and simple as possible, not tie it down with excess red tape. It should be no more complicated than say signing up for online banking.

And for you people who are saying this program is to take away people's guns - this program has been running for many years - has anyone had their guns taken away?
2
2
Rating: 0
glen p robbins
Please read the first 12 pages of the article and you will understand why the federal New Democrats are rethinking their position.

The RCMP have 4 provinces opting in to the Canadian Firearm's Program - Ontario, Quebec, and Atlantic provinces. BC, Alberta, Sask, Manitoba and Nunavet have opted out.

Ontario - Quebec have their own provincial police force - BC is seriously thinking about it. These three largest provinces represent (71.5%) of the entire countries population. As I have cited -- the Canadian Firearms Program provides $6 to every $1 that goes to the RCMP - yet the Canadian Firearms Program is administed by the RCMP Commissioner's office. Remember that little fight over power at the top.

Consider the next role for Canada's military -- in the north maybe?

Look at the amount of $$ spent on border security its 21 billion or one-thirty fifth the amount for the current registry.

What firearms are coming over the border illegally -- handguns or long guns? If it were long guns as the inference from the Canada Supreme Court would suggest than why is only 21 billion being spend on the border security for this.

People, respectfully, you cannot look at issues emotionally - you must be rationale.

Read the first 12 pages - make some notes and think about it with a bias going in.

No matter what you think of firearms - and most people in the city don't approve of any firearm -- this plan makes no sense - and if the hand guns are any indication - the cost of this could escalate to $10 billion.

Honestly, this is an exercise in separating the opinions of the intelligent people willing to investigate a little and people who might be smart and have an opinion based on personal bias and not the best outcome.
4
1
Rating: +3
glen p robbins
Migzy - I'm with you here - but would add - we have to be careful with foot in the door politics---business. For instance -- there was never enough study done on salmon farming -- I knew in the mid 80's when we were financing these things -- of the potential problems -- {Pacific Aqua} was one company (not mine) that comes to mind. Nothing was ever done -- now the argument is - we can't do anything about it -- it is a half million dollar business - and job losses now in this economy...etc.

Government is in the business of foot in the door -- Campbell is staying on when everyone wants to murder him and Hansen -- to get enough feet in the door of remaining projects - not the gun registry but like this Gun Registry example -- so that suckers -- who aren't supportive of the business models -- as you describe -- pause and think about the money invested that would be lost-----these are the cynical calculations that are made every day by these crazy people.

Presently, the HST is Campbell's cover--and he isn't available -- so that his minions can get the feet in the door - while he is away. Guaranteed. The robbery of taxpayers beyond the HST is going on right now.

In 1998 I started my private public opinion company for the sole purpose of identifying potential targets for government investment (ideological and other--foot in the door projects) --in order to de-spin the paid for public opinion polling used at the time/which continues to this day. (Like Star Wars--they launch we blow it out of the sky with the support of the public) The theft of your dollars is rampant. One of dozens of examples of our success in this regard would be the Campbell government intention to privatize the Coquihalla Highway circa 2003 -- we were out in front of that long before other polls followed -- with numbers against as high as the HST (which we were also long out in front of).

Now - because no-one controls us - governments - have no idea when we might publish on them -- out their collective organized con.

I'm certainly pleased with our success -- but it is important to ensure that taxpayer money isn't spent on projects that don't have functional business models - despite the so-called blue ribbon reports that always support them//(almost everyone no matter their CV will write anything for money)---and the foot in the door techniques like the gun registry--these people don't care about your money --- an entire culture of sociopaths - drinking coffee at the same place as you --eating in the same restaurants---shopping in the same stores---while you worry about getting by--they don't give a shit about your money -- and if you think kick backs are NOT going on ALL of the time -- again just because YOU don't do it -- don't put your good ethics on these people -- they are quite simply legitimized 'criminals'.

Post Campbell -- all Citizens need to look at every potential large expenditure of government dollars extremely cynically -- as soon as you see the trial balloon---question it --go Bruce Allen on it-- if you feel the need it could be the next 700 million dollar over expenditure of a convention centre or a white elephant roof --- for someone's pal --etc.
4
2
Rating: +2
beelzebub
"Also, since we have to register and license our cars, what is so wrong with having to register guns in our possession? "

Its not the law abiding citizen that uses firearms to commit crimes. Do the criminals register the stolen vehicles used to commit crimes? The very best that you can expect is that IF a firearm is connected with a criminal, you can find out who registered it. Does that give you the person that stole it? No. Does that tell you anything before the fact of a crime? No. Does it prevent another criminal from using it? No. You might get an unsafe storage charge if you catch them with it.

You might however, if the average citizen registers his guns, keeps his address current, be able to tell if there are any in his house when the police have to go there. Too bad you wont be able to tell if they are securely locked up or not. Oh well, just send in the SWAT team just in case eh?
1
1
Rating: 0
torch
The "confiscation" that is feared by the "paranoid" law abiding guns owners that people seem to not believe can/will/has happened actually has happened and over 500,000 firearms were banned almost immediately following the passing of bill c-68. The way it works is this...

-They don't like the "look" of your gun
-the classification is changed from non-restricted (longgun/hunting rifle) or
restricted (handgun,short barreled sporting rifles) to prohibited (banned unless grandfathered)
- You get a letter saying that you must turn over your legally bought firearms that was "safe" yesterday to the police or you will go to jail and all your "firearm-property" will be confiscated...
- You will not be compensated for your financial loss (some firearms are worth $20000+ each)
-Your firearms are now confiscated...

2 models of Firearms were confiscated from there owners this year...just so happens there the ones with extremely low ownership numbers...interesting?

Toronto Police also had a door to door confiscation program this year for those who had expired licenses... the other provinces just send out letters or make a phone call...also interesting.

These are just the ones I found with a quick search off the internet....

Lots of confiscations, you just have to look.
1
1
Rating: 0
Al Fillmore CD
If you have all the legal paperwork and you have a long gun registered in
your name THAT makes you responsible for THAT firearm.

WITH THE GUN REGISTRY you will make damn sure if you decide to sell that
long gun THAT the person who buys it is licensed to own firearms and you
will make sure the registration is transferred into the buyers name.

WITHOUT THE LONG GUN REGISTRY you can sell that gun to anyone you feel like
BECAUSE without the gun being registered in your name it can no longer be
traced back to you should it end up at a crime scene.

Hence getting rid of the gun registry opens up a whole new gun market for
the criminals out there.

NOBODY talks about this part of the gun registry. I wonder why?

1
2
Rating: -1
Add new comment
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.