Universal Firearm Registration in Canada: Three Perspectives

Abstract

For decades, firearm regulation has been a source of spirited debate in Western countries, particularly in North America. However, the enactment in Canada in 1995 of the Firearms Act, which, among other things, called for the establishment of a registration system for all lawfully owned firearms, has polarized Canadians like few other justice issues. The rifts between several provinces and the federal government, between western and eastern Canadians, and between urban and rural dwellers have been amplified by this legislation. Until December 2002, the debate as to the merits of the registry was largely a partisan one involving little more than hypothetical scenarios and anecdotal evidence. Rigorous, non-partisan research as to the registry's impact upon public safety is, as yet, unavailable. However, the release of the Auditor General's Report near the end of 2002 constituted the first significant, independent assessment of the registry, and its revelations about serious cost overruns dealt a severe blow to the program. The Auditor General's highly critical report reignited debate as to the cost effectiveness of the registry and lent credibility to opponents of the program, who have lamented its costs and its perceived intrusion upon personal liberties. The Auditor General's report has precipitated some changes in the administration of the program that will, among other things, ensure that it will operate more transparently. In addition, there is added pressure to study its impact on public safety. The three contributions that follow constitute the reflections of three academics who have written about firearms-related issues before. The opinions expressed reflect the diversity of views on the issue of universal registration. Any conclusions at this point are necessarily tentative, as the deadlines for registering firearms and the associated amnesties have only recently passed. The first contribution, by Neil Boyd of Simon Fraser University, notes that the decline in firearm-related mortality in Canada has coincided with regulatory changes beginning in the late 1970s and culminating in the enactment of Bill C-68 in 1995. While Boyd is careful not to make too much of this association between regulation and mortality, he argues that the increasing regulation of firearms reflects cultural change; specifically, a growing intolerance on the part of Canadians for firearms and their associated perils. The apparent trend of declining gun ownership is, according to Boyd, a reflection of this cultural change. Fewer firearms, in turn, result in fewer fatalities. Boyd claims that the registry is beneficial to public safety and suggests that the intense criticism of the program's cost is due not to its lack of impact or to poor management, but to unusual scrutiny as a result of its highly politicized nature. In addition, he asserts that some of the costs have been incurred as a result of legal challenges by the registry's opponents, as well as an aggressive campaign of non-compliance and even sabotage by some gun owners. The second contributor, Philip Stenning, formerly of the University of Toronto and currently at Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand, is less sanguine about universal registration. Stenning begins by reminding us that the registration of firearms is nothing new in Canada. Handguns have been registered since the 1930s, and even long guns were subject to registration during World War II. He notes, however, that despite Canada's experience with registration, evidence is lacking as to its merits. Notwithstanding the lack of evaluation, proponents of long gun registration have recently pointed to the number of requests law enforcement agencies have made of the registry. Stenning argues, however, that baseline data on the volume of such requests prior to the registration of long guns are not available and that these requests might concern matters other than registration. …