Federal Gun Advisers Testified On Gun Registry Bill

Long Gun Registry

First Posted: 01/31/2012 6:22 pm Updated: 02/ 2/2012 9:35 am

Information released this week by the federal government has some opposition MPs thinking twice about testimony they heard a few months ago.

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews tabled a list of the experts serving on his firearms advisory committee Monday, in response to a written question from a Liberal MP.

The advisory committee includes several people who appeared before a parliamentary committee last fall to support government legislation to scrap the long-gun registry.

When Murray Grismer testified before the public safety committee last fall, the Saskatoon police officer made it clear he was appearing as an individual who supported the bill to abolish the long-gun registry.

"My comments here today are mine and mine alone," Grismer told MPs on the committee.

But according to the documents, Grismer and three others who appeared before the committee are members of the panel that provides advice and expertise to Toews, the minister responsible for the bill to scrap the registry.

Grismer and the others did not disclose their membership on the advisory panel to the MPs on the committee.

Grismer told CBC News Tuesday he didn't see a problem in appearing before the committee to express his personal point of view.

"I went there as an individual. I was asked to appear. I got a call from the clerk and had no direction from any member or the minister's office."

Simon Fraser University Prof. Gary Mauser is another member of the firearms advisory committee who testified in November. "I appeared as an individual. I was not sponsored by anyone. I did not represent any organization or my university or the government. I represented myself."

Opposition members on the public safety committee saw things differently.

"When you see a witness supposedly as an individual, with some individual point of view, who is actually an appointee of the government itself, there to bolster the government's position — and that's what they did — then I think that's wrong," the NDP's Jack Harris said Tuesday.

Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia said it was a matter of transparency, adding that committee members might have approached the witnesses in a more skeptical manner or asked different questions had their affiliation with the advisory panel been disclosed.

"That advisory council was stacked with individuals who are bent on eliminating the registry and other forms of gun control in Canada."

Scarpaleggia added that committee hearings are intended to bring in the public to offer a variety of opinions and technical expertise, "not ... as a tool for organizing one's supporters."

The government has on several occasions refused to provide an updated list of its firearms advisory committee, but the list tabled this week shows it remains much the same as it did back in 2006, one of the last times it was made public. Several of the members on the list make their affiliation known on their own websites.

Candace Hoeppner, parliamentary secretary to the public safety minister, said it's up to opposition members on the committee to do their research. "All they had to do was ask a few questions or be prepared, which it seems that they weren't."

Hoeppner said witnesses appear before Commons committees in various capacities.

"It's not at all uncommon for individuals who in their capacity advise ministers or the prime minister, they do so openly. And then they go and testify in their capacity — and I'll give you an example, the governor of the Bank of Canada, Mark Carney," she said.

Advisory panel members John Gayder and Linda Thom also appeared before the committee as individuals. Members Tony Bernardo, of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association, and Greg Farrant, of the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters, also appeared as representatives of those organizations.

The other members of the federal advisory panel are Linda Baggaley, Steve Torino, Alain Cossette, Louis D'Amour, Gerry Gamble and Kerry Higgins.

Committee members are not paid, but the government covers their expenses. Information also tabled Monday shows that since January 2008, the committee has incurred travel costs of $19,863 and hospitality expenses of $4,238.

Loading Slideshow...
  • What does this new bill on the gun registry do?

    We keep hearing about scrapping the long-gun registry, but really what we're talking about is scrapping the requirement for people to register their rifles and shotguns - that's what Bill C-19 aims to do by making amendments to the Criminal Code and Firearms Act. Once passed, people will not have to register their non-restricted or non-prohibited firearms. It also provides for the destruction of existing records in the Canadian Firearms Registry for those firearms. <em>With files from CBC</em>

  • What exactly is the registry?

    It's a centralized database overseen by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police that links firearms with their licensed owners. It contains information about all three types of guns that must be registered - non-restricted, restricted and prohibited. (All firearms must be registered.) To register a firearm, you have to have a licence to possess it.

  • Does the bill make any changes to licensing requirements?

    No. Canadian residents need a licence in order to possess and register a firearm or ammunition and that won't change. There are a couple of different kinds of licences because of various changes to laws and regulations over the years.

  • What are long guns?

    There are three types of guns under Canadian law: non-restricted, restricted and prohibited. Most common long guns - rifles and shotguns - are non-restricted but there are a few exceptions. A sawed-off shotgun, for example, is a prohibited firearm. A handgun is an example of a restricted firearm. Different regulations apply to different classifications of firearms.

  • How many guns are we talking about?

    As of September 2011, there were about 7.8 million registered guns. Of those, 7.1 million are non-restricted firearms.

  • Why does the government want to get rid of the long-gun registry?

    The government says it is wasteful and ineffective at reducing crime and targets law-abiding gun owners instead of criminals, who don't register their firearms.

  • Who wants to keep it?

    Police and victims' groups are big supporters of the registry. Police say the database helps them evaluate a potential safety threat when they pull a vehicle over or are called to a residence. They also say it helps support police investigations because the registry can help determine if a gun was stolen, illegally imported, acquired or manufactured. This year, the RCMP says police agencies accessed it on average more than 17,000 times a day.

  • When will the registry cease to exist?

    The government has passed the legislation and the registry no longer exists. Except for in Quebec, where an ongoing court challenge means the owners must still register their guns in the province.

  • Why does the government want to destroy the records?

    The government is doing this to ensure that no future non-Conservative government can recreate the registry. Public Safety Minister Vic Toews has also made it clear that if any province wants to set up its own registry it would get no help from the federal government. The Conservatives are so fundamentally opposed to the existence of the records, because they say they focus on law-abiding citizens instead of criminals, that they don't want them available for anyone to use.

  • How much does the registry cost?

    The registry cost more than $1 billion to set up in 1995 and the cost was the source of much controversy. Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said on Oct. 25 that the government's best estimate is that it costs about $22 million a year to operate. That's the entire registry, not just the long-gun portion, but he noted most of the guns in the registry are long guns. He said he didn't know how much money scrapping the requirement to register long guns would save the government. Conservative MP Candice Hoeppner says there are also "hidden costs" that are borne by provincial and municipal police agencies to enforce the registry.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST CANADA POLITICS

Information released this week by the federal government has some opposition MPs thinking twice about testimony they heard a few months ago. Public Safety Minister Vic Toews t...
Information released this week by the federal government has some opposition MPs thinking twice about testimony they heard a few months ago. Public Safety Minister Vic Toews t...
Filed by Michael Bolen  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 103
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
Newfoundlander
I'm a pessimist, an optimist with experience!
12:17 AM on 02/06/2012
"Did The Conservatives Pull A Fast One On Gun Registry?"
**********************************************************

Does Harper lie?
Do fish like water?
Do the Tories believe that campaign promises are not to be kept?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
colpy
02:13 AM on 02/06/2012
Ahhh...you kinda blew it with number three....considering the "dismantling" of the gun registry has been a Conservative promise for YEARS!!!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:34 AM on 02/03/2012
KEEP THE GUB"MINT OUTTA OUR BEDROOMS, GUN CABINETS, AND WOMBS!!!!

FREE MARK EMORY

VOTES FOR OYSTERS

FTW

breathe.....breathe.....breathe
11:39 AM on 02/02/2012
get rid of this gun registry once and for all and stop wasting my tax dollar on stupid ideas... otherwords get your nose out of my gun safe... now ...
07:12 PM on 02/02/2012
While they can use my tax dollars to support the gun registry, because angry guys like you, that want to hoard guns in secret, make me very uncomfortable.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
colpy
09:37 PM on 02/02/2012
To own firearms you must be licensed..........

According to research done by Dr. Gary Mauser, the rate of murders committed by licensed firearms owners is less than one half the murder rate in the society at large.
That is besides the fact that gun owners are overwhelmingly male, and by definition have easy access to guns.

http://www.nfa.ca/presentation-dr-gary-mauser

In other words, you are statistically at much less threat from a licensed gun owner than from any person chosen at random.

So now explain to me how an outrageously expensive, notoriously inaccurate list of guns will make them even safer????
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Brent Millar
When the going gets weird, the weird turn Pro
04:49 PM on 02/04/2012
Sorry to rain on your parade JAck, but you don't ever get to decide what your tax dollars are spent on?

If that were the case, then I don't want any of my money going to usless Techno-Prisons and even more useless F-35 Jet fighters. But alas, I have no input.
Neither do you.
Live with it and move on.
What is it with COnservatives and your delusions of being able to decide what, where, when and how your tax dollars are spent?
WHere did you ever get the crazy idea that you had a say in any of it?
04:38 PM on 02/01/2012
Harper pulled a "fast one" for sure but that's how he operates, like limiting debate when he feels like it. He is light-years ahead of the Opposition. Oh oh, I forgot, we don't have an Opposition.
04:34 PM on 02/01/2012
Who paid for their trips to comment? If it was the govt then there is a problem, if they paid for it by personally and did not write it off or expense it to the govt then thn it would count as their OPINION. If they got paid to be there.......
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JackHoffman
Pundit
08:14 PM on 02/01/2012
Delusional drivel.
07:14 PM on 02/02/2012
Delusional drivel- is that how you refer to libel and fraud in the court of law?

I sure wish that some of you tuff on crimes whiners would apply the letter of the law to yourself.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Brent Millar
When the going gets weird, the weird turn Pro
04:55 PM on 02/04/2012
That's what you percieve that as?
Sorry, but this is a massive conflict of interest, but not to you?

If so, it's time to stop being an idealogue and embrace transpareny and accoubtability, not to mention law and order. I know you've heard these words before, someone used them an awful lot during their campaign to become Prime Minister. Think back, they meant something at one point in your life...

But I guess to you, they only apply to those of a different political stripe than you.

You're an embarassment to critical thinkers everywhere...or should I say, adults...
photo
Add In Canadia
Egotism is a weakness
03:45 PM on 02/01/2012
It's more like the people who created the gun registry in the first place pulled a fast one on Canada.

The gun registry does not do anything that our gun licensing system already does when it comes to preventing gun crime, and does it far better at that. No one has been able to provide an example, or explain logically how the gun registry is useful in any way to prevent a gun crime.

All people ever say is "Police reference the database everyday" but then fail to mention to what ends. They have to reference it to input data, and it's probably pulled up every time whenever an associated name is brought up; but that doesn't mean the information was ever useful. If you're a police officer going into a dispute or confronting a dangerous individual you always assume the other party is armed before approaching; regardless if a registry tells you if they have a gun or not.
04:37 PM on 02/01/2012
Yes because having more information than you need is a bad thing, does that mean having less information is a good thing? Only time I've ever seen that be the case is when someone is trying to hide something.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
colpy
05:16 PM on 02/01/2012
So of course the gov't should collect and save every bit of information they can possibly garner about the citizenry..........I mean, if you're doing nothing wrong, why would you care??

Ever hear of Joe Stalin? Or read Orwell's 1984????

Didn't think so.
photo
Add In Canadia
Egotism is a weakness
07:41 PM on 02/01/2012
There's a difference between useful information, useless information, and redundant information.

The gun registry falls somewhere between useless and redundant. It's redundant in the sense the licensing system already does everything the gun registry does, and useless in the sense that police cannot assume people are unarmed regardless of the information they are given.

All that means is the gun registry is a waste of money. That the millions spent on the registry to prevent gun crime would have been better spent on police officers to prevent crimes in general.
photo
Liz Wilson 2
“a small group can change the world
09:27 PM on 02/01/2012
I would be interested in hearing your comments on the article not just your opinion on the registry. Do you see any problem with people appearing in front of the committee who fail to fully disclose their connections to the politics of the issues?
photo
turkeylurky
Just keepin it real........
03:24 PM on 02/01/2012
Getting rid of the long-arm Registry is a good thing - it was nothing but a useless boon-doggle in the first place.
There is no evidence that it ever stopped or prevented a crime.
04:33 PM on 02/01/2012
Hello then why has the crime rate beeen getting lower?????
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
colpy
05:03 PM on 02/01/2012
Demographics.

The crime and murder rates have crashed in the USA as well.........at the same time as gun laws there have eased, and almost every state started letting its citizens carry concealed handguns.

An aging population means less young (16 to 25 years) males that commit an overwhelming amount of crime.....less perpetrators, less crime.
yer
Stop the Alberta Taliban
10:17 AM on 02/03/2012
Crime is the lowest in 20 years. Don't let the facts hit you on the way out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbPtJ1ml5Zw
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Atim-moot Tugayak
Sun News is Dark and Hateful.
01:45 PM on 02/01/2012
Does the bill make any changes to licensing requirements? "No. Canadian residents need a licence in order to possess and register a firearm or ammunition and that won't change." - hmmm....so the firearms will still need to be registered? Much ado about nuttin.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TwoZeroOZ
02:17 PM on 02/01/2012
Do you know the difference between registration, and licensing?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:45 AM on 02/03/2012
No. the owners are registered, not the guns.

BTW this is not a left/right issue many of my lefty cuddly friends and I dislike the gun registry and the unreasonable way it was set up. Laws and policy shouldn't be made while in the throes of hysteria.
01:23 PM on 02/01/2012
This is just another example of how the New Right/neocons in Canada (aka the 'Harperites') see everything through the politicizing lens of partisanship, rather than objective or impartial principles. They just don't get it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
colpy
04:17 PM on 02/01/2012
It was supposed to cost 2 million dollars. Instead it cost 2 billion dollars.

It is so inaccurate it can not be used in court without supporting evidence.

It has been largely ignored by gun owners, estimates extrapolated from previous gov't information indicate that only about 50% of the long guns in Canada are registered.

The destruction of the registry has long been an integral part of the Conservative platform, and they have been elected to a majority.

Both the NDP and the Liberals have to use pressure or censure or both to get all of their MPs to support it.

Who isn't being objective???
06:10 PM on 02/01/2012
You address several different political issues. I was addressing the Parliamentary process involved in this story.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:48 AM on 02/03/2012
There are plenty of Liberals and New Dems who don't like the registry.
12:34 PM on 02/03/2012
That could well be, since all 'progressives' (by definition) politically tend to be less rigidly ideological than the Harperites. But that wasn't the specific issue here. The issue was the use by the Harperites of a rigidly ideological 'process'.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
opprobrious
More speech. Less Flagging.
12:54 PM on 02/01/2012
Assume the Tories will pull a "fast-one" on anything they attempt to do.
11:54 AM on 02/01/2012
I like my long guns. Wish I didn't have to go through registry but oh well, paperwork isn't too bad. Licensing and registry are two different things, people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Atim-moot Tugayak
Sun News is Dark and Hateful.
01:45 PM on 02/01/2012
please explain? I'm a firearms intructor and no one, not my MP nor the proponents of the registry has a valid explanation about wanting to destroy the registry. My MP is a Con and he wants to do away with it yet we still have to register our guns when we buy them. I bought 2 guns last summer using my FAC. Took me 5 minutes to register them and it didn't cost me a penny. What's the big deal? The only real opposition seems to be it was started by Liberals and its been a talking point of Harper since it started.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
colpy
09:11 AM on 02/04/2012
Hmmm....a firearms instructor should know that the Firearms Acquisition Certificate (FAC) system has been defunct for 20 years......now one requires a Possession and Acquisition License (PAL) to buy or keep firearms.

Under C-19, there will be no registration whatsoever. Show your license, and walk out with your long gun.

The system has been outrageously expensive, horribly inaccurate, and has been used effectively only for the seizure of firearms the RCMP unilaterally decide are not nice.

It has to go.
11:43 AM on 02/01/2012
another ethically challenged advisor to the government --
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cariboofly
Aye, Ready, Aye & Semper Fi
11:26 AM on 02/01/2012
"Opposition members on the public safety committee saw things differently." Are these the SAME opposition parties that prevented their MPs from voting the way that their CONSTITUENTS had told them to vote on the private member's bill a year ago? Are these the very same opposition parties that, by their leaders TELLING THEM HOW TO VOTE, actually PREVENTED that bill from passing?
That's what I thought. Some kind of credibility, huh?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
opprobrious
More speech. Less Flagging.
12:55 PM on 02/01/2012
I guess you never studied political science, eh?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cariboofly
Aye, Ready, Aye & Semper Fi
01:49 PM on 02/01/2012
No, but I HAVE studied the ways and means of politics. There is STILL no excuse for elected representatives voting contrary to the majority of their constituents wishes. MPs and MLAs have somehow rationalized that they are elected to be their party's spokesperson to their constituents, when their DUTY is to represent their constituents in Parliament or Legislature.
photo
Liz Wilson 2
“a small group can change the world
07:36 PM on 02/01/2012
Couple of points.... first this article is about how the committee members were intentionally misled. If you want to rail about something - the abuse of power would be a great place to start.

Secondly, using the party whip is part of the party system - all parties use it all the time - Harper's government moreso than any other government in history. He whips his members to the point of providing them with talking points and to make sure that they do not stray from the message his candidates rarely take part in election debates.
We really need to have honest government that we can count on to act with integrity otherwise we have fascism, dictatorship, and communism all roled into one ugly abuse of democracy.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cariboofly
Aye, Ready, Aye & Semper Fi
09:26 PM on 02/01/2012
I reject your one-sided point of view. I choose to rail against dishonest politicians, period. That goes for Clement, Harper, Layton, Rae, Chretien Martin, Mulroney, et al. The constant partisan propaganda on every news commentary forum is a discredit to democracy and the search for truth.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
piceaglauca
The picture says it all....
10:19 AM on 02/01/2012
The GTA doesn't offer much in the way of good hunting, but there are still more than 85,000 people in the area legally licensed to own a gun.

More than five million people live in the Greater Toronto Area.

Some of those people probably head out to Ontario's woods to go hunting once in a while, but that doesn't explain why there are more than 287,000 non-restri­cted weapons in the urban area.

A news report suggests the rural-urba­n divide on the subject of gun control may not be much of a gap at all.

"This isn't a rural-urba­n issue," former Ontario attorney-g­eneral Michael Bryant told a reporter.

The Conservati­ves have frequently described the federal long-gun registry as unfair to rural residents because they are more likely to own guns. Certainly rural people do own guns, both for hunting – and in the case of farmers – to kill animals that damage crops or kill their domestic animals.

But when you add up the gun ownership in Canada's largest urban area, it's clear the requiremen­t to register guns has been dealt with by many city-dwell­ers too.

The big question is why Torontonia­ns own so many guns.

The same news report says more than 21,000 people in the GTA own more than five guns each. There are 823 firearms owners with more than 30 guns in their possession­.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
colpy
11:02 AM on 02/01/2012
We have no need to "explain" our legal ownership of firearms to you, to the idiots who wrote the Star article, to the police, or to anyone else.

Having jumped through all the hoops, and demonstrated that they are responsible citizens as a requirement of getting a license, what right has anyone to question their lawful activity???

This is EXACTLY the reason the Firearms Act has met such resistance from the shooting community..........idiots that treat gun ownership itself as some kind of emotional or psychological leprosy.....that treat gun owners instinctively as suspicious, almost criminal.

An upraised finger to you, Sir.

Guess which one?
11:38 AM on 02/01/2012
you also have to demonstrate ability to drive a car -----you need a license and you have to register the vehicle --and you need insurance ---you also have to register your dogs
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
opprobrious
More speech. Less Flagging.
12:56 PM on 02/01/2012
I've come to understand you a little bit more...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27/intelligence-study-links-prejudice_n_1237796.html?ref=canada&ir=Canada
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cariboofly
Aye, Ready, Aye & Semper Fi
11:32 AM on 02/01/2012
So what? Are they in your neighbourhood firing random shots around continuously? No, if they were, they wouldn't have their guns. So what the hell is your hair on fire about? Are you worried about getting shot in the street? Better start campaigning against the two-way drug smuggling across the border that brings in automatic pistols and machine pistols in exchange for dope grown in S. Ontario. Not legitimate and legal gun owners and gun collectors, NO MATTER WHERE THEY LIVE.
04:56 PM on 02/01/2012
Why do people need a licence to own a hair salon and need to register with the city? Why do gun owners think they are so special?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
piceaglauca
The picture says it all....
10:17 AM on 02/01/2012
What's the point of all this nonsense? Do these Liberals ever give up? Who do they represent and what is their view? Would the situation be any different for the Liberals. It's a "gun" deal.

Places like Toronto is a good example on why the focus on guns and their use should be focused there, not some farmer in northern Saskatchewan.
"The GTA doesn't offer much in the way of good hunting, but there are still more than 85,000 people in the area legally licensed to own a gun.

More than five million people live in the Greater Toronto Area.

Some of those people probably head out to Ontario's woods to go hunting once in a while, but that doesn't explain why there are more than 287,000 non-restri­cted weapons in the urban area.

A news report suggests the rural-urba­n divide on the subject of gun control may not be much of a gap at all.

The Conservati­ves have frequently described the federal long-gun registry as unfair to rural residents because they are more likely to own guns. Certainly rural people do own guns, both for hunting – and in the case of farmers – to kill animals that damage crops or kill their domestic animals.

The big question is why Torontonia­ns own so many guns.

The same news report says more than 21,000 people in the GTA own more than five guns each. There are 823 firearms owners with more than 30 guns in their possession­. "
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
colpy
05:40 PM on 02/01/2012
Toronto is not the centre of the universe.

In fact, it is not even the centre of Canada.

Sorry to disappoint you.
07:06 AM on 02/02/2012
Neither is the west, nor the rural areas. In fact given economic and political power you can say Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and Vancouver are the centers of Canada.