How Firearms Registration Works
It doesn?t.

By Professor Gary Mauser, Simon Fraser University Burnaby, BC, Canada,
& Dave Kopel of the Independence Institute

n the United States, universal firearms registration is demanded by groups
such as Handgun Control, Inc., and the “Million” Mom March Foundation. They
argue that registration would encourage greater responsibility among owners
and also provide police with better methods of tracing lost or stolen
firearms. Opponents argue that such a scheme would be unworkable and, at
best, just create another costly bureaucracy. The recent introduction of
firearm registration in Canada enables us to see how firearms registration
actually works.

Jean Chr?tien’s Liberal government pushed through a massive revision of
Canada’s firearm laws in 1995, with Bill C-68. The new law, among many other
things, required that long guns (rifles and shotguns) be registered. Handgun
registration had been required since the 1930s.

When firearm registration was introduced, the federal government claimed that
it would cost no more than $55 million (US) over 5 years. Although few
firearms have been registered, the cost of setting up the firearm
registration bureaucracy has already passed $350 million (US) and the total
may reach $1 billion (US) in 2001. Other governmental priorities have
languished while costs have skyrocketed for firearm registration. The total
number of Royal Canadian Mounted Police (“RCMP”?only Americans call them
“Mounties”) officers declined, and RCMP salaries were frozen for seven years,
while the number of employees working on firearm registration grew to around
600 in 1999 and to over 1,700 in 2000.

Canadian polls find over 80% of respondents supporting registering firearms,
slightly more than the number of Americans who say they support registration.
But public opinion begins to shift as soon as people realize that it will
cost them ? as taxpayers ? serious money or that it will divert governmental
resources from more desirable programs. Canadian support drops to 50% when
respondents are told that it might cost $500 million to register firearms;
dropping further to around 40% when the trade-off is a reduction in the
number of police officers.

Despite the absence of any organization in Canada similar to the powerful NRA
(Canada’s National Firearms Association is much smaller), firearm
registration had a significant impact on Canadian politics. Five provinces
have held general elections since 1995. Firearm registration was an issue in
every one of them; no party supporting firearm registration was elected.

Firearm registration also had a powerful impact on the federal election this
November. Opposition to firearm registration was an important reason that the
Liberals were all but shut out in western Canada by the Canadian Alliance.
Although registration was not an important issue in central Canada (Ontario,
the population center of Canada), opposition to firearm registration did help
the Alliance to win seats in rural Ontario, and helped the Conservatives in
Atlantic Canada.

According to the father of modern policing, Sir Robert Peel, the police must
have the support of ‘the policed’ for laws to be enforced effectively.
Experience in Australia, New Zealand, and the United States shows that
gun-owner non-compliance with registration is widespread.

In Canada, surveys show that many gun owners will refuse to register. This
percentage has increased since the law was passed. In 1995, 72% said they’d
comply. In 1997, only 58% said they would. The rejection of firearm
registration by “the policed” necessarily accelerates the tendency towards a
militarization of the police. This will further act to divide the police
from the policed.

The debate over firearm registration has caused deep divisions in police
ranks. Surveys of serving police officers show that many do not support this
legislation. The Canadian Police Association has voted to reconsider its
support for firearm registration.

In Canada, as in the U.S., gun laws are usually passed during periods of
public hysteria or fear, then, after the threat recedes, individual rights
and freedoms have been further diminished. Firearm owners serve as a
convenient “devil” for the government to justify passing new legislation. A
frightened public supports new restrictions on their individual freedom
because the government claims it needs more power to deal with the threat. In
the past, the Canadian government has demonized other minorities: Orientals,
labor organizers, and Quebecois separatists.

During the 1930s, handguns were the first type of firearm to be registered
when the Canadian government feared labor unrest as well as American “rum
runners.” There were separate permits for “British subjects” and for
“aliens.” Subsequently, during World War II, firearms were confiscated from
all Orientals, even Chinese Canadians.

In 1977, the protection of property was eliminated as a suitable reason for
acquiring a handgun. Police routinely refuse to issue a firearm permit to
anyone who indicates they desire a firearm for self-protection (although
Canadians still use guns defensively.)
http://www.saf.org/journal/11Mauser.pdf In 1991, after a nationwide campaign
demonizing “gun owners,” the government vastly expanded the list of types of
firearms that needed to be registered. In 1995, Bill C-68 was rammed through
parliament over the protests of three of the four opposition parties. This
bill banned small and short-barreled handguns on the grounds that they could
be easily concealed. Presumably, large caliber handguns are less dangerous.
In addition to prohibiting and confiscating over half of all registered
handguns, Bill C-68 also:

Significantly relaxes parliamentary oversight of the process of prohibiting
weapons through order in council (allowing gun bans without the need for
parliamentary approval);
Broadens the police powers of “search and seizure” and expands the types of
officials who can make use of such powers (allowing the police to enter homes
without search warrants, to “inspect” gun storage and look for unregistered
guns);
Requires suspected gun owners to testify against themselves;
Requires firearm licenses to possess and acquire firearms, and to buy
ammunition;
Requires the registration of all firearms, including shotguns and rifles.
Immediately after the federal election this November, the government decided
to classify BB and pellet guns as firearms; and then expanded the list of
restricted weapons.

The demonization of average people who happen to own a gun lays the
foundation for a massive increase in governmental intrusiveness in the lives
of ordinary citizens. In short, firearm registration is already damaging
traditional Canadian liberties and freedoms, while protecting criminals by
keeping police off the street. Is this what Americans want to happen in the
United States?

An earlier version of this article was presented to the annual meeting of the
American Society of Criminology in San Francisco, November 17?20, 2000