REVscene Automotive Forum - Independant Analysis on Gun Registry Expenses Released.

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)

- Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events (https://www.revscene.net/forums/vancouver-off-topic-current-events_50/)

- - Independant Analysis on Gun Registry Expenses Released. (https://www.revscene.net/forums/644891-independant-analysis-gun-registry-expenses-released.html)

Independant Analysis on Gun Registry Expenses Released.

Coles Notes: The conservative numbers for the potential savings scrapping the LGR eould give are impossible, the entire fire arms registry costs only $11 million dollars per year according to an independent analysis obtained through an Access to Information request. In an attempt to save the registry the NDP is looking to further lower the cost.

Quote:

Globe and Mail

An independent cost-benefit analysis of Conservative legislation to kill the federal long-gun registry has found the public savings could amount to just over $1.5-million annually – and that there are only two good reasons to scrap the program.

One is a reduced burden on gun owners. The other is a lighter load for taxpayers.

NDP tables long-shot bill to bridge divide on gun registry

Conservative math doesn't add up on gun registry

Long-gun registry vote highlights divide within Liberal Party

But in contrast to the tens of millions of dollars in savings estimated by the Conservative government, the 2009 analysis for the RCMP by Peter Hall of the management consulting firm Pleiad Canada Inc., found that scrapping the long-gun registry would save between $1,570,000 and $4,025,000 a year.

Those numbers were first made public in August when they were inserted toward the end of a 70-page evaluation of firearms programs conducted by the RCMP. Mr. Hall’s report, which was obtained by The Globe and Mail using Access to Information legislation, provides an explanation of how the savings were calculated.

While Mr. Hall could identify just two benefits to the legislation to kill the gun registry, he found 20 “costs,” including increased risks to the public and police, less-efficient investigations and less accountability.

Opposition MPs said this week that Mr. Hall’s analysis would have been useful had it been available in September when Parliament was in the middle of a heated debate in advance of a vote that ultimately defeated an attempt by Conservative backbencher Candice Hoeppner to kill the registry.

The report says that in 2007-08, the cost of administering the Canadian Firearms Centre was $61.72-million. The firearms-licensing program accounted for $50.56-million of that, while the cost of registering all firearms, including restricted and prohibited weapons as well as long guns, was $11.16-million.

“So those are the kinds of numbers from an independent agency that the Conservatives wouldn’t want floating around because it puts the lie to the [claim of] hundreds of millions of dollars being spent on the long-gun registry as opposed to where most of the money is being spent, which is on licensing,” said Joe Comartin, the NDP justice critic.

The Conservatives intended to continue the licensing program even if they had managed to kill the long-gun registry. And there would still have been costs entailed in registering restricted and prohibited weapons.

“The government held out a variety of figures in the $70-million, $80-million, I heard $100-million range when, clearly, they had a report that said it was nothing like that,” said Mark Holland, the Liberal public safety critic.

“They buried this so we didn’t have it for the debate,” he said. “They were trying to get the House to vote with blindfolds on.”

The Conservatives, meanwhile, are standing by their assertion that the registry is both costly and useless.

“This September’s very close vote is the furthest we have come to dismantling the $2-billion wasteful and ineffective long-gun registry,” said Christopher McCluskey, a spokesman for Public Safety Minister Vic Toews. “We will continue to work to scrap it.”

Mr. Hall concluded that if legislation to scrap the long-gun registry were passed, and if staff were no longer required to classify guns to determine whether they are non-restricted, restricted or prohibited weapons, the firearms program could eliminate 63 full-time positions. That would save taxpayers $3,360,000 in salaries and benefits, and there would be an additional savings of $650,000 in information technology costs.

But if some of the people now employed to register long guns were still required to classify the weapons, said Mr. Hall, the savings would amount to just $1,570,000 annually.

System enhancements that would be required in the first year after the program was scrapped would reduce those savings by $375,000, the report said.

Posted via RS Mobile

LOL @ only 11mil per year.

the gun registry was supposed to cost canadians $2 million, it has cost over a billion.

There is absolutely no evidence that it has prevented any crime.

Why would you want to waste anymore money on it, when those funds could be much better spent on other crime reduction measures.

Anyone know the numbers of registered gun vs illegal gun crimes?
Posted via RS Mobile

I think a big part of this report is proving that the Liberal claims on the annual costs were completely accurate, while the Conservatives were laughable. Many people would support the gun registry being maintained if it only costs a few million dollars a year and wouldn't if it costs 65.
Posted via RS Mobile

Gun registry does NOT prevent crimes.

I'm not falling for this trap.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2damaxmr2 (Post 7427487)

Gun registry does NOT prevent crimes.

The Conservatives intended to continue the licensing program even if they had managed to kill the long-gun registry

The Conservatives intended to continue the licensing program even if they had managed to kill the long-gun registry

The Conservatives intended to continue the licensing program even if they had managed to kill the long-gun registry

The Conservatives intended to continue the licensing program even if they had managed to kill the long-gun registry

The Conservatives intended to continue the licensing program even if they had managed to kill the long-gun registry

The Conservatives intended to continue the licensing program even if they had managed to kill the long-gun registry

I have my license already and your point is?

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2damaxmr2 (Post 7427487)

Gun registry does NOT prevent crimes.

Can you show me a program with that costs 1-4 million dollars per year that makes a significant difference in gun crime?

Take it for what it is, the gun registry is currently an inexpensive tool that the RCMP finds useful and makes it more difficult for criminals to gain access to guns. It might save 1 life a year, that's almost immeasurable, but still worthwhile.
Posted via RS Mobile

It never saved anyone and it never will. Gun registry does NOT track stolen/smuggled firearms.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2damaxmr2 (Post 7427724)

It never saved anyone and it never will. Gun registry does NOT track stolen/smuggled firearms.

The RCMP might disagree with that statement, can you support it somehow?

Of course it doesn't track stolen/smuggled fire arms, but it prevents legally purchased fire arms from easily entering the criminal market place, which is a huge problem in the states.
Posted via RS Mobile

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2damaxmr2 (Post 7427724)

It never saved anyone and it never will. Gun registry does NOT track stolen/smuggled firearms.

Name me one program that tracks anything stolen or smuggled.

Seems stupid you have to register your car but not your gun.

The gun registry has helped put killers people behind bars saving lives.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manic! (Post 7427812)

Name me one program that tracks anything stolen or smuggled.

Seems stupid you have to register your car but not your gun.

The gun registry has helped put killers people behind bars saving lives.

Lojack, mobileme,

Quote:

Originally Posted by geeknerd (Post 7427845)

Lojack, mobileme,

Someone who stole something could disable those systems if they chose to smuggle or resell something though, I think Manic's point, however vague, was an infoulable system that can't be bypassed.
Posted via RS Mobile

MindBomber, you asked me in another thread about our gun laws to which I replied with some info but you never responded.

Let me share some information with you:

1. Cost of the registry
We've been hearing that the firearms program costs anywhere from $2 to $100 million dollars of taxpayers money to run each other, with an accumulated cost of approximately $2 billion + since its inception in 1995. Both the Liberals and the Conservatives quote numbers from "independent" studies to support their claims, so I personally would not trust either at this point.

This report from the Auditor general in 2006 estimates total cost of the program to be at around $100 million http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/En...1_e_14446.html

This report from the RCMP in 2010 estimates total cost to be around $66 million, and the registration cost to be around $4 million (page 13 and on) http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/pubs/fire-...l/eval-eng.pdf

This report from the Tresury Board of Canada puts the REGISTRATION portion of the cost to the RCMP at around $22 million http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/201...C-eng.asp#bm07

We can see that there's no clear indication of how much the registration portion really costs, but also that it does NOT cost ONLY $ 4 million. The Liberals have been quoting the low end of the figure whereas the Conservatives the higher end. Either case, we are still being lied to but anyone with any common sense can see that it is NOT what the original cost as was planned when the bill was introduced in 1995. More on this later in relation to the cost-benefit analysis.

2. Usefulness of the registry to front line Police Officers
If you're a cop and you get a domestic dispute call, you run the address in your computer (which, initially, has nothing to do with the Firearms database, but is still registered as a "hit") and it comes up saying "no firearms at this residence". Would you approach this call thinking that "I'm safe, the registry says there's no guns here", and confront the residents thinking that you are safe? Or, would you approach every call the same way (cautiously) regardless of what the registry tells you? Think about it for a second.

Here's a link to 45 pages of front-line officers that do not find the registry to be useful http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publi...s/2009/976.pdf

Here's a report from the Canadian Shooting Sports Association on a an informal survey done with officers throughout Canada http://www.cdnshootingsports.org/201..._20100819.html and http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publi...licequotes.htm

Sure, it probably doesn't hurt to have the registry, but it sure sounds like the cops see it as something they can go by without.

3. Gun Registry as a tracking system for stolen guns, leading to prevention of crime
Think about this one for a bit, let's say I have a bag of hammers and they are all registered with the government, 2 of them were stolen and I reported so to the Police. The police noted in their database that "Bonjour43MA lost 2 hammers" then moved on, never look into how and why they were stolen, and where they may end up. 5 months later, someone used one of the hammers to smash a guy's head in during a home invasion incident. The police goes to the crime scene and recovers the hammer, runs the serial number against their database and goes "yip, this was stolen 5 months ago from Bonjour43MA", and puts it in the evidence bag, and continuing on with their process of looking for the assailant, using other evidence found at the scene (finger prints, DNA samples, etc).

Tell me, how did registering my hammer help the Police prevent this horrific crime? If the sole purpose of the registry was to prevent crime, why do we still hear about shooting/stabbing deaths everyday on the news, when we ALREADY have it in place?

4. RCMP's support of the registry
The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police http://www.cacp.ca/index/main is the organization that has been quoted in saying that the RCMP supports the registry. Unfortunately, the CACP is not a policing entity, in fact, it's a political entity that takes donations from any that wishes to do so. http://www2.macleans.ca/tag/cgi-group/ The CGI group maintains the registry's online database. Conflict of interest, no?

Donations/endorsements sent to the CACP ensures that they are vocal about supporting the registry, creating a false impression on the public that "the police" (including the RCMP) want to keep the registry for the safety of the public. That may be the case but the real reason behind their support is always in question. The CACP can say that they "represent the law enforcement community" but that is completely false once you consider who their financial backers are. Go back to point 2 to see what the front-line officers, those that are in the field, think about the registry instead.

5. Cost is not a concern as long as it saves one life
Again, an emotional issue like gun-control can often lead to illogical thinking for finding a solution. One may say "so what the registration costs $x million of dollars, as long as it saves one life, it's worth it!". First of all, there has been no proof of any kind that the registration has ever prevented any gun-related crimes (including the use of illegal firearms) from happening. Secondly, you can apply the same logic and preventative measures to things like automobile-related deaths caused by drunk drivers, where more police road checks can be setup and be run on an even more regular basis, and at more intersections on our roads. Surely that would save more than one life, right? and people would simply stop drinking-and-driving for good?

Cost is definitely a concern, no matter how much it is. Why keep wasting money on something you can't proof to be useful, when the money can be spent elsewhere like Health Care of Social programs, that MAY be able to save lives as well?

I'm not anti gun registry, to be honest with you. I think it's not a bad way to hold legal gun owners accountable for what they do with their guns (not selling to random people, not trafficking legal firearms into the wrong hands, etc). However, I do have a problem with the government selling it as a crime prevention tool, something that's supposed to keep everyone safe from the gangster out there. What they failed to realize is that, hey, criminals don't don't obey any laws whatsoever, so how would having strict gun-control on law-abiding citizens have ANY effect on the outlaws? No one from the pro gun control side can ever answer me that question so I'm curious to hear it from some of you here. What is gun-control, and which members of society is it really trying to control?

Look, I don't agree with what a lot of those gun nutz think and say (wanting concealed carry laws, removal of licensing AND registration systems, etc etc), but when it comes to gun laws, emotional elements are often emphasized instead of logical reasoning and common sense. It is much easier to come up with laws to "control" how legal firearms can be acquired after tragedies involving guns, than to spend the money and resource on proper screening process on license applications, proper mental health care support, and proper law enforcement support (more of it).

"Guns are bad! If they weren't here no one would've ever been killed!", as many anti-gun supporters would yell, yet they fail to realize that, hey, when someone goes crazy, they'll grab whatever they can find and carry on with the mayhem. No guns? Alright they'll grab knives. No knives? Alright they'll grab hammers. So on and so forth. There will always be crazy people out there, criminals that have absolutely no respect for others or the law, and to those people, any form of "control" or "restrictions" will NEVER apply. This is one point that most anti-gun people don't seem to get or understand - no matter how strict the laws are, criminals do not obey them. They are called criminals for that very reason - they don't care about what's legal and what's not.

Bottom line is, our current gun laws were written by those that have no real understanding of firearms (why would a semi-auto AK47 be more deadly than a semi-auto hunting rifle? why prohibit firearms based on names alone, as if the name of the firearms increase their firepower?), with influences from gun control lobbying group, as a knee-jerk reaction to tragic shooting incidents involving firearms (Ecole Polytechnique), by a government that was seeking re-election votes from voters. I hope the laws can be better (re)written with the introduction of new bills, so that the Firearms program can "save lives" by properly screening and filtering out those individuals that should never get their hands on firearms due to unstable mental or health issues.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MindBomber (Post 7427475)

Oh, poor baby. Still upset the Conservatives won their majority? So you couldn't convince people to vote anything but Conservative, so now you're going to try to convince people they made the wrong choice after the fact?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manic! (Post 7427812)

The gun registry has helped put killers people behind bars saving lives.

Do you have any evidence at all to support this claim?
Posted via RS Mobile

Isn't one of the points of the registry to be able to distinguish between legally and illegally procured weapons? Which sounds like no big deal I suppose but is actually one of the ways that the police prosecute and track organized crime.

gun registry does not prevent crime, death penalty does (in some way).

Its very easily for me right now to go into my safe, use a piece of sand paper to sand the serial# and toss it out on to the street. There will be no way for the gun registry to track that. Point is criminals do not follow the laws, we law-abiding citizen do. How many of those car thiefs in surrey have their driver licences/icbc insurance? none, they are still stealing cars.

LGR will not save lives, it never did and it never will. Did the LGR save the 4 rcmp's life that were kill in alberta number of years ago? Nope. all in all, its a big waste of money, criminals will continue to do what they do because of the flawed justice system.