Posted by Ian:
In response to the most recent City Scope column (Nov. 28/09 below) Bruce N. Mills documents (complete with footnotes) a half-dozen key argument points to consider in support of “10,000 — a number worth investigating further” …
Point One: Criminals – who by definition are the most dangerous to public safety – don’t register their guns! The registry can’t tell cops where these guns are.
Point Two: the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police is nothing more than a special interest lobby group of appointed politicians, who receive hundreds of thousands of tax dollars from the very departments they lobby to. They also received large donations from TASER Int., and CGI, the company that built the firearms registry system . You can guess why they support these two items. (I also understand attendees at a recent convention were papered with Celine Dion tickets – Ian)
Compared to figures in the billions and even trillions we read about daily relating to deficits and bailouts, a number in the thousands is a minuscule drop in the bucket.
Take the figure 10,000 for example — a sum being bandied about in many quarters as the number of times the national gun registry is accessed on a daily basis.
It’s gospel according to the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and front and centre in material being distributed by the Canadian Labour Congress in their campaign to maintain the long gun registry which could soon be dismantled if Bill C-391 passes final vote.
However, upon closer inspection, the daily figure of 10,000 just doesn’t pass muster. Yes indeed, the registry does receive that many daily hits on average, but closer scrutiny is warranted.
Don’t scrap the national gun registry, instead fix it, advised St. Thomas Police Chief Bill Lynch on the front page of last Saturday’s Times-Journal.
Lynch told the T-J he supports the position of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police that the current registry, even with its flaws, should be maintained.
He added police see the registry as a valuable tool front line officers use often when answering calls, especially ones like domestic disturbances.
“Historically, there has been a lot of controversy about it,” Lynch admitted. “It could be more efficient, probably.”
But the answer is not to tear it down or get it rid of it, he believes.
“Let’s try to fix what we have,” he suggested.