Andrew Ikeman | News Editor
LAST YEAR AROUND this time, I wrote my very first full article for the Fulcrum. The opinions piece, entitled “Hey Harper,” was about my opposition to the recently announced plans to cut the federal long-gun registry, which has since been cancelled.
I wanted to know why our prime minister was so intent on destroying a list of the names of people in this country who are in possession of a firearm. It’s not unreasonable to want to know who owns a gun. I was simply trying to understand why a country would get rid of a list of names that existed doing no harm, and was simply to inform the police and other services if a person was in possession of a gun.
“While the gun registry may have cost more than expected during its inception, its current cost is minimal—and now that there is an established registry, why destroy it and waste all the money that’s already been sunk into it?” I wrote last year.
I felt validated this week after seeing that the Canadian Press had reported that the RCMP cited a 2008 study on the cancellation of the gun registry. According to the report, the savings gained from cancelling the registry will be between $1.5 million and $4 million. That’s a lot less than the $7.7 million the registry cost from 2010–2011 and a serious reduction from some of the estimates we heard at the time of the registry’s dismantling. So why are we not getting the full amount that was going into the registry?
The article goes on to talk about how the most expensive cost associated with the registry—the actual registering of guns to owners—was removed, but the most functional part of the registry—the database of existing gun owners—was destroyed.
Looking back on it, you have to wonder why they even got rid of the registry. Not only does its destruction seem to have been moot, but the government has now left itself vulnerable to the voters over a registry that was not hurting anyone. The truth about the registry’s dismantling is that the government has opened themselves up to more problems and more possibilities for attack, with opposition members of Parliament itching for a fight and the province of Quebec currently facing court challenges to keep the registry alive. It would appear, at least for the moment, that the registry will once again be a pain in the backside of the prime minister and the minister of public safety.
The registry was not formed as a partisan motion. The original idea was to know who had a gun, and why. It was not to punish honest farmers, or take down criminals on the street. It was simply to gain knowledge and inform our police officers when they are going to arrest someone who owns a gun.
