IT IS TIME to say good riddance to the costly and ineffective long gun registry, part of the Canadian Firearms Program.
Rather than addressing the problem it was established to tackle, gun crime, the registry became a make-work project for computer software engineers who received hundreds of millions of dollars but have yet to produce a fully working system. In all, close to $1 billion, sorely needed to fund a host of priorities, from agriculture to health care, was wasted on a policy that was misguided from its inception.
Read Also
Agriculture needs to prepare for government spending cuts
As government makes necessary cuts to spending, what can be reduced or restructured in the budgets for agriculture?
Despite the perception from the nightly news, firearm related homicides were not, and are not, rapidly rising. Indeed the homicide rate is not rising. It has been trending down since the mid-1970s, due mainly to an aging population.
The registry was a political response to terrible, but few, high profile killings that caused a public outcry.
Rather than cracking down on criminals with guns, the Liberal government decided to extend already extensive gun control laws to require that every gun owner be licensed and every gun be registered. Licences had to be renewed every five years.
The overwhelming majority of people caught in this broad net were hunters and rural residents who keep a rifle or shotgun for animal predator control.
It was twisted logic that assumed crime can be stopped by monitoring and regulating law-abiding citizens.
Then there was the staggering cost. The registry was to be mainly self-financing from fees. But developing the registry’s software proved a financial black hole.
Although auditor general Sheila Fraser says management has improved since her highly critical 2002 program review, there are still problems with the accuracy of registry data and in its ability to show how it directly increases public safety.
The Conservative government has announced it will introduce legislation to repeal the long gun registry and in the meantime will not enforce parts of the current law.
Gun control proponents say that, while mistakes were made in the early days, the program is close to working well and the annual cost is dropping, so why get rid of it? The answer is that it is still a costly and complex restriction without a measurable impact on public safety.
The Conservatives say their replacement will still require gun owners and users to be licensed, and will retain the requirement for gun safety training and a background check. It will still require safe storage of all guns, restrict handguns and prohibit certain weapons,.
A less costly, targeted plan can achieve the desired results and free up money for more effective and measurable public safety programs dealing with gangs, gun trafficking and suicide prevention.
And the rancher with a rifle can go about his business without registration worries.
