The gun registry: Turning 150,000 regular law-abiding citizens into paper criminals

Creating 150,000 paper criminals

The gun registry: Turning 150,000 regular law-abiding
citizens into paper criminals.

Pierre Lemieux - March 10, 2008

In the March 1 Canada Gazette, the federal government proposed "three independent initiatives... to enable previously lawful firearms owners to bring themselves back into compliance." (Interestingly, the French translation blurs the "previously lawful" and the "bring themselves back.") Disregarding a minor fee waiver and other aspects of the regulatory jungle, these initiatives would extend for a third year the 2006 amnesty for long-gun owners who have neglected to renew their possession and acquisition licences, or have not registered all their guns, or have let the non-renewable possession-only licences expire.

Since 2001, being in possession of a firearm without a licence carries a jail sentence of up to 10 years. According to a regulatory impact analysis statement
that accompanied the proposed orders, "as of January 31, 2008, more than 150,000 expired licence holders were still in possession of their firearms," and are now paper criminals. This does not include all those (certainly in the hundreds of thousands) who did not apply for the new licences and kept illegally their formerly legal firearms, or who got a licence but did not register all their guns.

This whole field is the example par excellence of previous liberties turned into crimes, of a regulatory jungle that very few people understand, and of a political and bureaucratic class very happy with the increased power they have gained thereby.

Before the licencing requirement came into force, the government ran a big information campaign. At least one company involved in the campaign was Groupaction, which was also implicated in the sponsorship scandal--a fact that is not immaterial as we must remember that these controls are imposed by the corruptible state, not by sinless angels from heaven.

In the Summer of 1999, the government even hired students to lure gun owners into applying for a licence so they would be sucked into the system. The cool and misleading propaganda avoided mentioning the criminal implications of non-compliance: it was like a new service brought to you by your loving government.

Since then, the state has shown its teeth. The regulatory impact statements in the Canada Gazette are more explicit: "potential consequences for non-compliant long-gun owners," "criminal prosecution," "having... their firearms seized," "Criminal Code illegal possession offences," "enforcement measures..." In point of fact, all this started several years ago.

Why does the state want these 150,000 paper criminals to come and beg for their "privileges"? One reason, of course, is that it would be a tall order to arrest, try and jail all of them--"criminalizing large numbers of otherwise law-abiding firearms owners," as one of the impact statements puts it. Moreover, other Canadians might then realize what gun control is all about.

The regulatory impact statements suggest another reason: "The moment a firearms owner becomes non-compliant (e.g. licence has expired), that individual is automatically removed from the continuous eligibility screening, thereby withdrawing a tool enabling law enforcement to take pre-emptive measures..." Neglecting the confused grammar, the Newspeak expression "continuous eligibility screening" means, in English, continuous surveillance and peeping into the gun owners' intimate behaviour--like question 6(d) which, every five years, forces the applicant to reveal if he (or she) has "experienced a divorce, a separation, a breakdown of a significant relationship."

With their twisted logic, the statocrats admit that they want to bring everybody into the system in order "to take appropriate actions as required, including the revocation of a licence and seizure of a firearm." They want to force you to get a licence in order to be better able to seize your firearms when they want to.
Kapitch, Ivanov?

But hadn’t the Conservatives subliminally promised to do away with this Police State apparatus? Only M.P.Garry Breitkreuz, ceaseless defender of our liberties, wasn’t very subliminal, and he hasn’t been rewarded for that. This year’s $86.5 million budget for firearms licencing and registration is five per cent higher than the Liberals’ last annual budget. Note that the Conservatives’ Bill C-24 would maintain the whole licencing scheme established by the Liberals, and would only remove long guns from the "registry." The amnesty doesn't apply to handguns, whether classified as "prohibited" or not, whether registered or not.

The essence of what Allan Rock and Jean Chrétien established is now defended by Stockwell Day and Stephen Harper. These people just obey the logic of the state, acting alike in similar circumstances.

What should we say to the 150,000 Canadians who would be subject to police raids were it not for the amnesty? Hang in there, guys! Although you may simply have assumed that you were still living in a free country, ignoring that you were paper criminals, your passive resistance helps protect our liberties.

Pierre Lemieux, a former columnist with the Western Standard, is a professor, an economist, and author of numerous books and articles, and editor of Liberty in Canada, an online pro-liberty news source sponsored by the Canadian Constitution Foundation.

Pierre's weekly columns are also published at Liberty in Canada.

Submitted by Bruce

Police set to target firearm storage (Australia)

Police set to target firearm storage

Jason Dowling
March 9, 2008

VICTORIAN police are planning a crackdown on gun owners. They are set to check whether 18,000 of the state's registered gun owners have stored their firearms properly.

The crackdown comes as gun-related murders and gun theft have declined dramatically since the gun-law reforms after the 1996 Port Arthur massacre.

New research by the Australian Institute of Criminology shows that the theft of firearms has dropped 72% since 1995-96, with gun-related homicides also down. Guns now rank behind knives and physical assault as the most common method of murder in Australia.

Police say the decline in gun thefts and murders is due to tougher laws on the use, ownership and storage of firearms. The planned crackdown is to ensure the trend continues, police say.

In Victoria there are still more than half a million registered firearms.

A research analyst at the Australian Institute of Criminology, Dr Samantha Bricknell, said that since the early 1990s firearm homicides in Australia had dropped by about 46% and gun thefts had also fallen.

The majority of guns were stolen from homes, most of them "targeted thefts", she said, but very few of the stolen firearms had been used in crimes.

She said the main firearms owned in Australia were .22 rifles, bolt-action rifles and 12-gauge shotguns.

Victoria Police Superintendent Wayne Ashley said 185,442 Victorians had gun licences, 10,000 fewer than just six years ago. This was despite the number of registered firearms in Victoria slowly rising from 558,000 in 2002 to 586,292 this year.

Only 55% of weapons stolen in Australia were properly secured in a firearms safe or secure cabinet. In 9% of cases, firearms were left in a vehicle and in 7% of cases had been kept in a (usually) unlocked cupboard or wardrobe. Owners did not know where they had left their firearm in 7% of cases.

Superintendent Ashley said police would move to stronger enforcement of gun laws. He said it was not a "Big Brother" approach but rather police working with the community to ensure community safety.

The Department of Justice has released a discussion paper with suggested changes to gun laws, with new regulations due by April.

Guns in Australia

* 18,000 Victorians to have their gun storage checked this year.

* Theft of firearms down by 72% in Australia since 1995-96.

* Murders using firearms down by 46% since early1990s.

* 586,292 registered firearms in Victoria.

* 185,442 gun licences in Victoria — 10,000 fewer than six years ago.

Source: Victoria Police and Australian Institute of Criminology


Submitted by Bruce

Michigan sees fewer gun deaths — with more permits

Michigan sees fewer gun deaths — with more permits

January 6, 2008
By DAWSON BELL
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

Six years after new rules made it much easier to get a license to carry concealed weapons, the number of Michiganders legally packing heat has increased more than six-fold.

But dire predictions about increased violence and bloodshed have largely gone unfulfilled, according to law enforcement officials and, to the extent they can be measured, crime statistics.


The incidence of violent crime in Michigan in the six years since the law went into effect has been, on average, below the rate of the previous six years. The overall incidence of death from firearms, including suicide and accidents, also has declined.

More than 155,000 Michiganders -- about one in every 65 -- are now authorized to carry loaded guns as they go about their everyday affairs, according to Michigan State Police records.

About 25,000 people had CCW permits in Michigan before the law changed in 2001.

"I think the general consensus out there from law enforcement is that things were not as bad as we expected," said Woodhaven Police Chief Michael Martin, cochair of the legislative committee for the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police. "There are problems with gun violence. But ... I think we can breathe a sigh of relief that what we anticipated didn't happen."

John Lott, a visiting professor at the University of Maryland who has done extensive research on the role of firearms in American society, said the results in Michigan since the law changed don't surprise him.

Academic studies of concealed weapons laws that generally allow citizens to obtain permits have shown different results, Lott said. About two-thirds of the studies suggest the laws reduce crime; the rest show no net effect, he said.

But no peer-reviewed study has ever shown that crime increases when jurisdictions enact changes like those put in place by the Legislature and then-Gov. John Engler in 2000, Lott said.

In Michigan and elsewhere (liberal permitting is the rule in about 40 states), those who seek CCW permits, get training and pay licensing fees tend to be "the kind of people who don't break laws," Lott said.

Nationally, the rate of CCW permits being revoked is very low, he said. State Police reports in Michigan indicate that 2,178 permits have been revoked or suspended since 2001, slightly more than 1% of those issued.

Another State Police report found that 175 Michigan permit holders were convicted of a crime, most of them nonviolent, requiring revocation or suspension of their permits between July 1, 2005, and June 30, 2006.

But even if more armed citizens have not wreaked havoc, some critics of Michigan's law chafe at how it was passed: against stiff opposition in a lame duck legislative session and attached to an appropriation that nullified efforts at repeal by referendum.

Kenneth Levin, a West Bloomfield physician, was one of those critics. In a letter to the Free Press in July 2001, he referred to the "inevitable first victim of road or workplace rage as a result of this law."

Last month, Levin said he suspected "it probably hasn't turned out as bad as I thought. I don't think I was wrong, but my worst fears weren't realized."

But the manner in which the law was enacted was nevertheless "sneaky" and undemocratic," Levin said.

Other opponents remain convinced that it has contributed to an ongoing epidemic of firearms-related death and destruction.

Shikha Hamilton of Grosse Pointe, president of the Michigan chapter of the anti-gun group Million Moms March, said she believes overall gun violence (including suicide and accidental shootings) is up in Michigan since 2001. Many incidents involving CCW permit holders have not been widely reported, she said.

The most publicized recent case came early in 2007, when a 40-year-old Macomb County woman fired from her vehicle toward the driver of a truck she claimed had cut her off on I-94. Bernadette Headd was convicted of assault and sentenced to two years in prison.

Hamilton said that even if gun violence has ebbed, it remains pervasive, tragic and unnecessary. At the least, a more liberal concealed weapons law means there are more guns in homes and cars and on the street, she said, and more potential for disaster.

Advocates for the law argue that there is nothing equivocal about the experience of the CCW permit holders who have warded off threats and, in a few instances, saved themselves from harm.

In September, a 36-year-old Troy man killed an armed 18-year-old assailant who, with three other suspects, attempted to steal his car outside Detroit Police headquarters.

Michelle Reurink, 40, a consultant in Lansing, got her CCW permit last year, not so much because she felt an imminent threat to her well-being, she said, but because she's a strong believer in the Constitution's Second Amendment -- the right to bear arms.

"The primary reason I got it is because I feel like I have the right to have it," she said.

Still, she doesn't often carry her gun during her daily routine, though she takes it when she and her husband go on their boat, she said.

Having the license and a handgun makes her feel more secure in her home (where no one needs a CCW license to have a gun), she said. She also feels more secure because of the required training, including self-defense lessons, she took as part of the license application.

Mark Cortis of Royal Oak, who conducts concealed weapons license training and sits on the Oakland County gun board, said he believes the benefits of an armed citizenry are evident in small ways almost every day, as permit holders deter trouble and live more confidently.

"The police just can't protect you," Cortis said. "If you have to call 911, it's probably already too late."


Contact DAWSON BELL at 313-222-6604 or dbell@freepress.com.

Submitted by Bruce

Fuzzy Logic: Miller Time in the Centre of the Universe.

NOTICE OF MOTION

M16.1

Request Federal Government to Completely Ban Handguns in Canada

Moved by: Councillor Walker
Seconded by: Councillor Cho

SUMMARY:

In the last two years, Torontonians have experienced two outrageous, tragic acts of handgun violence on Yonge Street in the heart of Toronto’s downtown. In late 2005, Ms. Jane Creba, 15, was shot while shopping on Boxing Day, near the Eaton Centre and, last weekend, Mr. John O’Keefe, 42, was shot while walking past a bar just south of Bloor Street. These random victims were innocent bystanders, minding their own business, perhaps chatting to a friend when they were cut down by a stray bullet from a handgun, having their life ended before they knew it, without understanding why. Mr. O’Keefe was shot with a registered, legal handgun by the owner of the handgun.
These two incidents are only the most outrageous examples of the many murders that occur in our City.

Violent crime is increasing and the general populous feels less safe on the streets of Toronto than they did in the past. To date, governments have been reticent to follow through on an outright ban of handguns. Making all handguns illegal would reduce their prevalence in our society by providing a clear cut, zero-tolerance law that would both deter criminals before they pick up a handgun and deal with those criminals who act using a handgun. Simply, if there are less handguns available because of prohibition, then less of them will be used. The handguns that are used in crimes or found on persons can be easily ruled as illegal and the source of these
illegal guns can be focused upon. There just is not a good enough reason to continue to legally allow handguns in our City, our Province and our Country.

Making all handguns illegal would help make our communities safer. Knowing what we know, we cannot stand on guard to the best of our ability against tragedies on our streets, such as the murders of Ms. Creba and Mr. O’Keefe, without prohibiting handguns across Canada.


RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. That City Council request the Parliament of Canada to prohibit all handguns in Canada, including the sale or purchase and/or possession of any handgun by any Canadian citizen or any person within Canada (excluding police officers
and military personnel).

2. That City Council request the Parliament of Canada to institute mandatory sentencing (5 years minimum) of any person found guilty of possession of any handgun(s) or involvement in the sale or purchase of any handgun.

3. That City Council direct the Mayor to deliver this Resolution to the Prime Minister of Canada and to all the leaders of the Federal Opposition.

4. That City Council request the Premier of Ontario to support this Resolution and, working with the Mayor of Toronto, convey that support to the Prime Minister of Canada and to all the leaders of the Federal Opposition.

January 29, 2008

Submitted by: Bruce