Crime statistics don’t justify gun registration policy

——————————————————————————–

Re: Gun control is working, May 8.

While letter-writer Eric Houde is entitled to his opinion, it would be nice if he didn’t have to creatively massage his “facts” in the process.

To set the record straight, the “rigorous licensing of owners” he touts didn’t take effect until January 2001, long after firearm homicides had started to decline (a trend that actually began in 1975, predating all firearm licensing).

He confuses the issue by including firearm suicides and accidents in his data to make the decrease seem larger. The prominent firearm homicides at Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal and the Just Desserts restaurant in Toronto were the driving force behind the new laws, not suicides or accidents. In fact, firearm homicide totals have been remarkably stable since the late 1980s, predating by nearly 15 years both the new licensing scheme and long-gun registration.

While he correctly notes that the use of long guns in homicides has decreased since the late 1980s, significantly he fails to explain how the decline can be attributed to the gun control program given that mandatory licensing didn’t come into effect until 2001 and long-gun registration was not required until 2003.

With a minimal decline in firearms homicides and rising suicide totals (not just gun-related), how can a $2-billion start-up cost and $80 million a year in perpetuity for licensing and registration be seen as “a good investment”? Now that really would be “rocket science.”

John Orth,
Jordan, Ont.