Although the long gun registry survived by only two votes, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has vowed to continue the push to have the registry scrapped. All Canadians should also advocate for the scrapping of this expensive and unnecessary program.
The long gun registry has been a contentious issue in Canada ever since it was enacted 15 years ago. The registry is a large list of “long guns”, which include rifles, shotguns, and other non-automatic firearms larger than a handgun. Numerous sportsmen’s associations as well as the far-right Christian Heritage Party of Canada have been especially vocal. Harper claimed in Thunder Bay two weeks ago claimed that “opposition to [the registry] has not diminished, it has only increased.”
The basic worth of the long gun registry should be evaluated based on whether or not it reduces crime. Overall, the gun registry has been a non-factor in deterring violent crime and stigmatizes perfectly legitimate portions of society, such as hunters and rural Canadians. Additionally, it proves to be a divide between rural and urban Canadians. Interestingly, in the United States, where gun laws are less restrictive, relaxing concealed weapon carrying laws actually reduced murder rates by 8.5 per cent, according to the US Bureau of Statistics. These statistics run contrary to popular wisdom that tighter gun laws reduce crime.
Only one third of violent crimes are committed with long guns. (It is worth mentioning that handguns have been subject to a registry since 1934). The murder rate has lowered marginally in these years, and is more likely the result of an aging population rather than the registry. Moreover, virtually all these crimes were committed with unregistered firearms. The registry has not even been useful in the criminal investigation over the guns. This is due to the vast majority of registered firearms which belong to hunters, and nearly every murder in Canada is committed with an unregulated arm, often smuggled in from the United States. It is simple to smuggle guns from the United States and other countries.
There roughly 7.5 million registered firearms in Canada, most of which can be foun in Ontario, Quebec, Alberta, and British Columbia. The long gun registry has forced many Canadians to give up long guns, which are cherished family heirlooms. A story in the Globe and Mail it from 2003 reported one Canadian family was forced to give up their Brown Bess musket, the standard small arm of the British Empire for a century, which dated from the War of 1812.
An argument that is often put forward for the registry is that gun owners must be “accountable” for their ownership. So, mandatory safety courses are not enough? Often, gun ownership runs in families, so is being taught to respect firearms from a young age not enough? The gun registry is a waste of Canadian taxpayers money which serves an esoteric purpose, and has questionable results.
Canada is a newly urbanized society. Prior to the 1960s, more than 70 per cent of Canadians lived on farms. Rifles, used for hunting small game to eke out a living in the rugged terrain of 19th and 20th century Canada, were a part of daily life. As well, citizen militia formed a significant part of Canada’s military history. Canadians from the frontier fought alongside British regulars defending Montreal and Queenston Heights against foreign invaders and additionally, one of our longest lasting regiments, The Lord Strathcona Horse, was a citizen militia, and remains so to this day. Guns and rifles are a part of Canada’s frontier history.
Ironically, the only party leader not to have answered a question as to whether he had had ever fired a gun was Stephen Harper. Every leader, including Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe, admitted to at one time firing a gun. Proper gun ownership is a widespread and legitimate hobby. It is simply wrong to punish sportsmen on the grounds that there are occasional abuses. It is misuse of firearms, and not their mere existence, that leads to crime. The gun registry is expensive, and has not achieved its goals, as it cost over 2 billion initially and varies between 80 and 100 million annually to be maintained. In addition, it has not changed gun crime but merely changed the nature of it. It is entirely unnecessary and must be revoked.
