Countering gun registry disinformation

In the attempt to delegitimize Canada's long gun registry, a concerted disinformation campaign has been mounted by those ideologically opposed to it.

Myth 1: gun death is an urban, gang-related problem. The Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians points out nearly 75 per cent of gun deaths are suicides. Here’s the perspective of a small-town doctor and coroner in rural Ontario:

"My own personal experience with gun-related death has mirrored the national statistics. Most are suicides, the great majority have involved long guns and, of course, they live in rural environments. I have never seen a death with a handgun and have never seen a death committed as a criminal act, with one notable exception of a murder as a result of domestic violence. Typically, I am called to a rural property or farm, where some headless corpse lies with blood and brains bathing the hunting rifle or shotgun that lies by the motionless body. As if this image wasn't soul-wrenching enough, I then have to deal with the anguished cries and the shattered lives of the loved ones of the deceased huddled in the family kitchen…Those who have voted to repeal the long gun registry clearly have a sterilized view of gun-related deaths. How else to explain their callous disregard for the health and safety of rural Canadians?"
--Alan Drummond, Perth ON, The Ottawa Citizen, November 9, 2009.

Myth 2: the gun registry does nothing to prevent gun deaths. In the words of a rural psychiatrist in an area of B.C. where guns are prevalent:

"I have invoked the gun registry…to either get someone’s guns removed or prevent them from getting guns because of mental illness. I am sure this has prevented tragedies but, unfortunately, none of those events make headlines…Before the gun registry was available…it was difficult…to have guns removed. There have been some 22,000 licences denied to date, and a recent Ottawa Citizen article reported that the number of firearms surrendered and confiscated…is 8,281 — 74 per cent of which were nonrestricted shotguns and rifles…the reason for these confiscations is usually that the individual has threatened or used violence. So, are we really comfortable with allowing these people to arm themselves by removing the mechanism which allows authorities to locate and remove firearms…?"
--Dr. Barbara Kane, the Guelph Mercury, July 3, 2009.

The long-time psychiatrist also notes gun deaths and injuries are at their lowest levels in over 30 years, that the rate of homicide with rifles and shotguns is half what it was in 1995 (when the long gun registry was introduced), and that gun-related murders of women have fallen by two-thirds. The gun registry may be an inconvenience for hunters, farmers and other gun owners, she says, “but it helps people like me and the police prevent tragedies.”

Myth 3: the long gun registry has cost $2 billion. Two-thirds of the costs opponents attribute to “the Registry” are related to screening and licensing all gun owners, not to the registering of long guns. These costs will remain even if the registry is shot down. Between 1995 and April 2005, net costs for the Canadian Firearms Program were $946.4 million, or about $95 million per year. In 2006, the auditor general found eliminating the long gun portion of the registry would only save a projected $3 million annually. (http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2009/11/04/gun-registry-vote004.html).

To put this in perspective, not long ago, the federal Government invested $400 million to widen a stretch of highway in New Brunswick where 43 people had died over 5 years. In the same period, guns killed 5,000. In any case, the cost issue is easily solved: make the gun owners pay.

Myth 4: Long guns are not associated with criminal activity. The Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians points out that last year, 34 per cent of Canadian gun-related homicides were committed with rifles or shotguns, as were 72 per cent of firearm-related spousal homicides. Between 1995 and 2004, the drop in the use of firearms in spousal homicides was 36 per cent.

We register our cars, boats, trailers, dogs and bikes: why is the registration of long guns such a unique hardship? And how does ignoring the opinions of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, the Canadian Police Association, the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians, the Quebec Public Health Association, the Canadian Paediatric Society, the civic administrations of Toronto, Montreal and Winnipeg advance the Conservative government’s devotion to "law and order"? Not to mention their duty to protect Canadian women, children, and of course men, who make up the lion’s share of gun violence victims.

Just what college students need: concealed weapons

Re. M.J. Ackermann 's letter in Feb. 17 Ottawa Citizen "Efforts against guns misguided:"

M.J. Ackermann cites the Dawson College shootings as evidence the Firearms Act is "counterproductive." He muses that if more of us carried guns, we'd all be safer.

Sure, that's what a college of 10,000 -- half of them still teenagers -- needs more of: concealed weapons. Let's hand them out at Health Services, along with the condoms.

This is a guy who lectured the Canadian Medical Association in 2003 -- with a straight face, one presumes -- "Guns themselves hurt no one. It is their abuse by malicious, suicidal or ignorant people that leads to harm. Stating that people are ‘killed by... firearms’ leads people to erroneously fear guns rather than those who abuse them, and we tend to end up with laws that attack the object rather than the behaviour (http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/168/10/1239-a)."

Sure, Dr. Ackermann. You could say the same thing about heroin (I don't know, maybe you do).

And if the good doctor could tell us who among the millions of firearms owners is about to go nuts next, I'll be glad to limit the legislation to "the behaviour." (Let's just give murderers a 'time out,' shall we? That oughta take care of the problem!)

Until then, as the mother of a Dawson student mercifully uninjured in the last rampage, I'll work to get more guns out of more hands.

Stockwell Day: Minsiter of public gun ownership?

Mr. Day: you're minister of public SAFETY, not of public gun ownership

Apparently, federal Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day has put his own guns on ice (Ottawa Citizen, Feb.14/07), at least for now. Hopefully they're locked safely away, along with his jet ski and all the other accoutrements of his illustrious career.

But Day keeps demonstrating an understanding of 'public safety’ as shaky as his notion of a successful photo op. One of his ‘new’ ideas on gun safety is a hotline to "enable people to notify authorities if a gun owner they know becomes unstable,” an old idea that obviously isn’t good enough. Such a hotline was set up in 1998, focused primarily on spousal notification. But in some provinces -- Quebec is one example -- citizens were encouraged to call if they had concerns about ANY gun owner.

Should average citizens take over Mr. Day's responsibility to keep us safe? Is this the Conservative government's idea of a plan, to have us psychoanalyze our neighbours?

Anyone with a true interest in public safety would know this: the risk of homicide is three times higher and the risk of death by suicide is five times higher in homes with firearms; the leading cause of gun death is suicide, usually committed with legally acquired hunting rifles; guns kill more children than cancer, drowning, falls, and fires combined; over 300 spousal violence incidents involving guns are reported annually in Canada.

The gun lobby perspective, that "guns are overregulated now and semi-automatics are unfairly vilified (Ottawa citizen, Feb.15/07)" is dumb as a bag of hammers. They say "firearms are significant, historical artefacts of Canadian culture and world history." So were torture and slavery; should we bring them back, too?

Some practices are bloodthirsty, archaic, and out of place in a modern, peaceful society.

Most Canadians don't think about guns that much; when they do, it certainly isn't as symbols of Canada’s “heritage.” What we think of is the threat to our children, to our communities, to ourselves. We don't care whether guns are automatic or semi-automatic: if they fire 20 rounds at our kid in 4.6 seconds rather than 2.4 seconds, our kid will still be dead. Most Canadians probably want civilian guns much more severely curtailed or better yet, outlawed completely. But we’re not organized the way the gun lobby is. Most Canadians would be appalled by the senseless, wanton death and destruction wreaked by guns and gun owners continuously in this country, if the media would only tell them about it. Here’s a small sampling from recent weeks:

· Edmonton Journal (Feb 10) A 10-year-old boy from a Hutterite colony near Donalda may never walk again after he was shot Thursday with a .22 rifle while playing a game of hide-and-seek.

· Toronto Sun (Feb 2) . . . seconds of confusion and fatal decision recalled by Toronto Police Staff-Sgt. Donald Cole, during the fourth day of a jury inquest into the May 7, 2002, death of Peter Francis, were so gripping jurors seemed to jump when the officer testified how he yelled out: "Police. Drop the gun!" . . .That gun was once a hunting weapon, stolen during a 2002 break-in at a Markham home.

· Montreal Gazette (Feb 02) A provincial coroner who investigated a murder-suicide in Verdun is calling for changes to gun-control legislation that would prevent a suicidal person from being allowed to own a firearm.

· CBC News (Jan 29) An ongoing feud between two groups of friends (!) was the catalyst for a weekend shooting in Pictou County. . . one man shot another with a rifle early Saturday after they got into a fight.

· Soleil de Valleyfield (QC; Jan 29) Nine rifles were stolen from a residence last week.

· Cochrane Times (AB; Jan 17) Blair Allan Elder, 27, was sentenced to nine months in jail on Dec. 19, following an incident . . . where a 17 year old was shot in the eye with a pellet gun, resulting in the loss of an eye.

· Globe and Mail (Jan 17) A New Brunswick man has been sentenced to house arrest for pulling a gun during an incident of road rage.

Maybe this one says it best: "WASHINGTON (Reuters) - American states where more people own guns have higher murder rates, including murders of children, researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health reported (Jan 11; NY Times)."

Could the fight against gun control really be about money? In their 2006 book The Global Gun Epidemic, Professors Wendy Cukier and Victor W. Sidel point out the US dominates not just the military weapons market but also the commercial weapons market, producing over 3 million weapons annually (p.72). Is it a coincidence the US National Rifle Association is the richest, “most powerful lobby in the world,” according to their awestruck kid brother, the Canadian Shooting Sports Association?

The Conservatives are the party of big business; they’re also the pro-gun party. Coincidence? What proportion of the party’s funding comes from pro-gun sources? Inquiring minds want to know.

Last fall, Mr. Day, beholden to the special interests of the gun lobby, kicked the police chiefs off the firearms program advisory committee, presumably for the crime of saying the registry works. He kicked those concerned with violence against women and children, public policy, and gun control off the committee too, but kept the collectors and vendors of semi-automatic weapons. Yes, good thinking, Mr. Minister. You're sure to get unbiased advice now.