Epic failures of the Gun Registry

Solomon Friedman talks to CKNW's Sean Leslie

2012-02-19T18:08:00.000-08:00

A great interview about the scrapping of the registry. Useful for people who don't understand the issues.

159-130 votes, the LGR is almost gone!!!

2012-02-15T22:13:00.000-08:00

YES!!!!!
Today is a good day, the bill to end the Long gun registry has gone through with 159 to 130 votes which means the LGR is almost dead, now only the Senate to pass through and then have the bill declared law.

This is the tide turning, today we celebrate and enjoy the moment, made possible by the hard work of thousands of Canadians and the politicians who represent them. many of us thought this day would never come, but some kept working at it, till the moment was right. As soon as the bill is declared law, I plan on shooting my papers.
Frankly I think we should get rid of the complete registry, but I suspect for the moment it's a bridge to far. I think though after about 5 years of data to back up the fact that the LGR was useless, then we can work on the remaining registry.

Finally a post that is not about a failure of the gun registry.

159 failures is a success in police eyes

2012-02-14T05:33:00.000-08:00

Re: "Man arrested after 159 guns stolen from outdoor store," Feb. 7.

The article contains some puzzling contradictions. Most glaring is the quote attributed to Saanich Police Sgt. Dean Jantzen: "Access to the long-gun registry has been critical to advancing the speed of this investigation."
This comment follows the police observation that, "a remarkable thing is that all the guns were registered through the long-gun registry . a valuable tool in tracking and accounting for all the weapons."
Why didn't the registry track and identify the 159 guns when they were being registered to the wrong person? Aren't we fortunate that this individual had no violent intent.
One can only pale at the prospect of how many similar registry errors may have placed hundreds or thousands of weapons into the hands of hardened criminals.
Moreover, the article states that police were tipped off by an owner of Island Outfitters after a year-end audit. It looks to me like the long-gun registry had nothing to do with the tip-off. In addition, it is reported that the suspect is co-operating with police, which indicates he has turned over all of the registry's erroneously issued paperwork with the firearms in question.
No other information is available or required for an investigation like this.
The only contribution the long-gun registry made was to waste taxpayer money by repeating the same error 159 times.

Myrna Francis

Brentwood Bay

http://www.timescolonist.com/Long+registry+only+wasted+money/6125527/story.html
Read more: http://www.timescolonist.com/Long+registry+only+wasted+money/6125527/story.html#ixzz1m72olhPr

Lorne Gunter: The gun-control lobby’s statistical black hole

2012-01-25T05:44:00.000-08:00

The list of reasons for getting rid of the registry just gets longer and longer....

Lorne Gunter: The gun-control lobby’s statistical black hole

Last month, the RCMP and Statistics Canada were forced to admit that they don’t keep statistics relating to the number of violent gun crimes in Canada that are committed by licenced gun owners using registered guns.
“Please note,” Statistics Canada wrote in response to an access to information request filed by the National Firearms Association, “that the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) survey does not collect information on licensing of either guns or gun owners related to the incidents of violent crime reported by police.” Nor does StatsCan’s annual homicide survey “collect information on the registration status of the firearm used to commit a homicide.”
This raises the question: Why did it take so long for the government to begin ridding Canada of the horribly expensive, unjustifiably intrusive federal gun registry? If no one in Ottawa had any systematic way of tracking whether or not Canadians suspected of committing a violent gun crime were licensed to own a gun and had registered the gun being used, then they had no way of knowing whether registration and licensing were having a positive impact on crime.
There are around 340,000 violent crimes reported to police in Canada each year. Just over 2% of those (around 8,000) involve firearms. (There’s another reason to question the initial wisdom of the gun registry: Why was Ottawa expending so much time, effort and taxpayer money on such a tiny percentage of violent crimes, while doing comparatively little to prevent the 98% of murders, robberies, kidnappings, rapes and beatings not committed with a gun?)
Typically, gun crime is committed by street criminals using stolen or contraband weapons. The gun registry never had any effect on this class of thug. Some of the 8,000 violent gun crimes no doubt were committed by licensed owners using registered guns — people who might be tracked or even deterred using a registry system. But since no one in Ottawa ever had any idea how many people are in this latter group, they had no way of determining the usefulness of the registry.
A cynic might say that not knowing was the point all along. Backers of the registry knew it would produce very little impact, so they deliberately didn’t bother collecting data that would confirm the database’s uselessness.
I think the truth is less conspiratorial (and far more arrogant): Backers were so sure the registry would produce tangible benefits, they never thought they might need to show proof. After all, they were experts and they had thought it up, so how could it not work?
I would have thought it was a better strategy to collect as much data as possible from year one. That way backers could track the decline in gun crimes committed by licensed owners using guns they themselves had registered. But neither StatsCan nor the RCMP — nor, for that matter, local police forces — tallies gun crimes relative to who committed them and whether or not the gun used was registered with the federal government. It was purely on blind faith that supporters of the registry — police chiefs, victims’ rights groups, women’s shelter operators and grandstanding politicians — assumed that making Canadians register their guns would magically cut down on violent crime.
Gary Mauser, an emeritus professor at the Institute for Canadian Urban Research Studies at Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, B.C., and one of the country’s leading firearms researchers, has done his best to piece together some sort of statistical analysis of firearms crime and licenced gun owners. Using Library of Parliament data and raw StatsCan crime numbers, Prof. Mauser believes about 3% of murders committed in Canada since the registry opened in 1998 have been committed by licenced gun owners using firearms, registered or not — this despite the fact that at least 8% of Canadians own firearms. Prof. Mauser calculates that this works out to a rate of 0.38 murders per 100,000 licensed gun owners versus a murder rate of 1.85 per 100,000 — nearly five times higher — for the population as a whole.
All of this shows what a horrendous waste of time and money the registry has been. The sooner it is dismantled, the better.
National Post

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/01/25/lorne-gunter-the-gun-control-lobbys-statistical-black-hole/

Birth of the Canadian Gun Registry

2012-01-10T05:41:00.000-08:00

Birth of the Canadian Gun Registry
A gang that couldn't shoot straight
by John Dixon

The Liberals' gun registry program was pointed at Kim Campbell, not crime. That's why it shot itself in the foot, says former justice adviser JOHN DIXON.

We now know that the government's gun-control policy is a fiscal and administrative debacle. Its costs rival those of core services like national defence. And it doesn't work. What is less well known is that the policy wasn't designed to control guns. It was designed to control Kim Campbell.

When Ms. Campbell was enjoying a brief season of success in her re-election bid in the summer campaign of 1993, Mr. Chretien was kept busy reassuring what he called the "Nervous Nellies" in his caucus that Ms. Campbell's star would soon fall. To bring her down, the Liberals planned to discredit her key accomplishment as minister of justice, an ambitious gun-control package.

Those measures -- enacted in the wake of the Montreal Massacre -- Included new requirements for the training and certification of target shooters and hunters.

We got new laws requiring: the safe storage of firearms and ammunition, which essentially brought every gun in the country under Lock and key; screening of applicants for firearms licences; courts to actively seek information about firearms in spousal assault cases; the prohibition of firearms that had no place in Canada's field-and-stream tradition of firearms use.

I was one of the department of justice officials involved in that Earlier gun-control program. When the House of Commons passed the legislation, Wendy Cukier and Heidi Rathgen of the Coalition for Gun Control, which had been part of the consultation process, supplied the champagne for a party at my Ottawa home.

So what were the Liberals to do, faced with a legislative accomplishment on this scale?

Simple: Pretend it hadn't happened, and promise to do something so dramatic that it would make Ms. Campbell look soft on gun control.

The obvious policy choice was a universal firearms registry.

The idea of requiring the registration of every firearm in the country wasn't new. Governments love lists. Getting lists and maintaining them is a visible sign that the government is at work. And lists are the indispensable first step to collecting taxes and licence fees. There is no constitutional right to bear arms in Canada, as is arguably the case in the United States.

So why not go for a universal gun registry? The short answer, arrived at by every study in the Department of Justice, was that universal registration would be ruinously expensive, and could actually yield a negative public security result (more on this in a moment). Besides, in 1992 Canada already had two systems of gun registration: the complete registry of all restricted firearms, such as handguns (restricted since the 1930s) and a separate registry of ordinary firearms.

This latter registry, which started in the early 1970s, was a feature of the firearms acquisition certificate (or FAC) required by a person purchasing any firearm. Every firearm purchased from a dealer had to be registered to the FAC holder by the vendor, and the record of the purchase passed on to the RCMP in Ottawa. So we were already building a cumulative registry of all the owners of guns in Canada purchased since 1970.

The FAC system was a very Canadian (i.e. sensible) approach to the registration of ordinary hunting and target firearms. If you were a good ol' boy from Camrose, Alta., and didn't want to get involved, you didn't have to - as long as you didn't buy more guns. Good ol' boys die off, so younger people in shooting sports would eventually all be enrolled in the system.

After the Montreal Massacre, the then-deputy minister of justice, John Tait, asked me to review the gun-control package under development. One thing I immediately wanted to know was how many Canadians owned Ruger Mini-14s (the gun used by the Montreal murderer). The Mini-14 came into production about the time the FAC system was introduced, so the FAC should have a good picture of the gun's distribution.

But when our team asked the RCMP for the information, we couldn't get it. Computers were down; the information hadn't been entered yet; there weren't enough staff to process the request; there was a full moon. After a week, I said I didn't want excuses, I wanted the records. Then a very senior person sat me down and told me the truth.

The RCMP had stopped accepting FAC records, and had actually destroyed those it already had. The FAC registry system didn't exist because the police thought it was useless and refused to waste their limited budgets maintaining it. They also moved to ensure that their political masters could not resurrect it.

Such spectacular bureaucratic vandalism persuaded my deputy and his minister to concentrate on developing compliance with affordable gun-control measures that could work. A universal gun registry could only appeal to people who didn't care about costs or results, and who didn't understand what riled up decent folks in Camrose.

Which is precisely why it appealed to those putting together the Liberal Red Book for the pivotal 1993 election. If the object of the policy exercise was to appear to be "tougher" on guns than Kim Campbell, they had to find a policy that would provoke legitimate gun-owners to outrage. Nothing would better convince the Liberals' urban constituency that Jean Chretien and Allan Rock were taking a tough line on guns than the spectacle of angry old men spouting fury on Parliament Hill.

The supreme irony of the gun registry battle is that the policy was selected because it would goad people who knew something about guns to public outrage. That is, it had a purely political purpose in the special context of a hard-fought election. The fact that it was bad policy was crucial to the specific political effect it was supposed to deliver.

And so we saw demonstrations by middle-aged firearm owners, family men whose first reflex was to respect the laws of the land. This group's political alienation is a far greater loss than the $200-million that have been wasted so far.

The creation of this new criminal class -- the ultimate triumph of negative political alchemy -- may be the worst, and most enduring product of the gun registry culture war.

John Dixon is a hunter, and president of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association. From 1991 to 1992, he was adviser to then-deputy minister of justice John Tait.

Wrong serial numbers

2011-12-20T05:46:00.000-08:00

From a gun forum:
Just bought a P38 and the serial number is not correct. They combined the real serial number and the number from the mismatched barrel assembly and left off the letter suffix. This is the third handgun I have bought that had a mistake on the registration.

Suffering from a "registry glitch"

2011-11-23T05:17:00.001-08:00

I also suffer from a registry 'glitch'. I inherited my dads guns so we transferred every gun registered to him to me and I took the lot of guns. Turns out he had 1 more registered to him that is now in my name but the gun doesn't exist.

It is a non-existent make with no serial # which I eventually figured out was because one of the rifles was registered twice, the second time being based off of some marking on the buttstock.

So I called the registry to explain the error and have it corrected.... NOPE. The registry doesn't make mistakes I am told.

If I want that gun removed from my name in the registry I must call the police and report it stolen. They will remove it only once I submit the police report. I explained that it is a crime to fraudulently report a crime to which they told me that is the only way they will remove the non-existent gun from my name.

Registered twice

2011-11-22T16:17:00.001-08:00

Thankfully the end is near:

So when the long gun registry came out I had 2 shot guns and a .22 registerd. 2 years ago now I had them all confiscated for unsafe storage. The police ran the serial numbers and determined that they werent registered. But offered to release them 2 months later, only if I registered them right then and there. So again I got the paperwork in the mail. Well I was cleaning out the file cabinet today and found the originals from 2003... funny same serial numbers different registration numbers.

A reply;

I had to register a rifle twice as when i sent in the ifo the forst time, i never got the registration certificate, and when i enquired was told they never got the form, but i had made copies of the forms before I sent them in, so i guess what i sent got lost on a desk some where. also another rifle I registered, I got in the mail a letter and a number, this number I was to stamp, etch on the rifle. when I enquired again about this number I was told that there was no serial number to the rifle, but i told them there was and that i had copies of the paper work that I had sent in.

Now get this, I was told that one reson was that this type of rifle had been produced so many times that the serial numbers where repeating themselves, and thats what I had to put this number on the rifle, and LOL get this, i was also told that maybe the scanner did not pick up the information I had sent in. So I redid the paper work and got it registered with out having to put new numbers on the rifle.

The end is near!!

2011-10-24T06:39:00.000-07:00

It's the beginning of the end for the Long Gun Registry. The bill has been tabled, we will have to see what other gems lurk within the wording. the question now is will the police respect the will of Parliament and not try to keep a secret registry. http://parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Pub=NoticeOrder&Mode=1&Language=E&Parl=41&Ses=1&File=4

No. 2	N^o 2
October 21, 2011 — The Minister of Public Safety — Bill entitled “An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act”.	21 octobre 2011 — Le ministre de la Sécurité publique — Projet de loi intitulé « Loi modifiant le Code criminel et la Loi sur les armes à feu ».

Focus on real solutions to violence

2011-10-16T16:37:00.000-07:00

Thought this letter really hit the nail on the head, I have bolded the part that is relevant.

Focus on real solutions to violence
Re: "Gun registry keeps women safe," Oct. 8.http://www.thewhig.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3327948

I was very disappointed to read this letter.

Supporters of the gun registry can't seem to keep their story straight. First they told us that the registry was needed for public safety. When that was debunked, they told us it was necessary for police officer safety. Since that was proven false, now they are telling us that the registry is needed for the safety of abused women.

In 2006, according to Statistics Canada, a mere 0.75% of all violent crimes, including spousal violence, were committed using a registered firearm. Given that such a tiny fraction of violent crimes involve registered guns, are we really expected to that the gun registry is such a useful tool in cases of domestic violence?

Why should legal gun owners be held accountable when legal guns are almost never used to commit a crime? If anyone should be held accountable, it's gun registry supporters. Instead of working toward real solutions to a complex problem, they have raised one false flag after another.

Instead of educating and empowering young women and teaching them how to avoid abusive relationships, gun control advocates have painted them as helpless victims of men and guns. All they have done is drive a wedge between the sexes and alienate the good men who are willing to help.

It's time to stop focusing on guns and start working toward real solutions to violence in our society.

A little update taken from a thread on CGN. some useful info.

Bottom line, of 38,000 or so reported incidents of domestic violence in Canada apparently some 40 or less involve a firearm. And ever fewer domestic violence incidents involving a firearm result in injury or death...Dorthy Jourdrie shooting her husband in Calgary several years ago brought those domestic violence gun status up as well. It is unknown which spouse was using the gun in those 40 or fewer incidents per year.
http://www.fact.on.ca/newpaper/np991122.htm

Au contraire, we know answers to both questions:
http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/collectio...XIE2008000.pdf

See Table 1.10, page 24 of this report.

The 38,573 violent domestic incidents are the ones that caused serious harm and were reported to the police, so all 40 of those involved serious injury. The table also breaks the incidents down according to sex of the victim. Of those 40 incidents, 34 victims were women and 6 men. It doesn't give the sex of the attacker, however. Note the above report is from 2008 and the data from 2006, it is the most recent I have seen in regards to breaking down spousal violence incidents.

This report from 2006: http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Collectio...XIE2006000.pdf

shows data from 1995-2004 in table 1.3, page 26. The total number of incidents was 211,791, with 358 involving firearms for a rate of 1.69 firearms incidents per 1000 total (0.169%).

One thing I find interesting is they break down the number of one time incidents and repeat incidents. 9 out of 358 firearms related incidents were considered "chronic". That is 2.5%. This completely belies the anti argument that guns are used all the time in domestic violence. Only 0.169% of all these incidents involved firearms and of that incredibly tiny number, only 2.5% were in the "chronic abuse" category. That means that firearms are used in chronic domestic abuse incidents only 0.004% of the time. That is 4 times out of 100,000 incidents. That doesn't really equate to "all the time" in my world.

Mark

480 BREACHES OF NATIONAL POLICE COMPUTER SYSTEM, RCMP REPORT

2011-10-03T09:49:00.000-07:00

This related to the gun registry as the CPIC system looks at the registry to tell the viewer if the person has firearms registered to them. In other words the Registry is just a giant shopping list waiting for any organized criminal gang to pluck.

480 BREACHES OF NATIONAL POLICE COMPUTER SYSTEM, RCMP REPORT
“Police computer system is putting Canadian gun owners at risk.”

Since 1995, the RCMP reported that Canadian Police Computer Centre (CPIC) system has been breached a total of 480 times. In a recent response to an Access to Information Act request the RCMP confirmed 66 additional breaches of the police computer system (CPIC) over the last five years. “The privacy rights of all individuals are being violated by trusted police sources, but Canada’s law-abiding gun owners are at particular risk,” said National Firearms Association (NFA) President, Sheldon Clare.
This new information was obtained from the RCMP through an Access to Information Act (ATI) request submitted as a collaborative effort by two independent researchers, Gary A. Mauser, Professor Emeritus, Simon Fraser University and Dennis R. Young, retired Parliamentary Assistant to Garry Breitkreuz, MP. “It is unfortunate that RCMP does not regularly report these breaches of privacy to Parliament,” added Clare. The RCMP’s response to our ATI request is now available on the NFA website:
http://www.nfa.ca/sites/default/files/RCMP-ATI-CPIC-Breaches.pdf
Without any real evidence showing that law-abiding gun owners have ever been a threat to public safety, the former Liberal Government used closure to force an unfair law through Parliament (1995’s Bill C-68, the Firearms Act) making simple possession of a firearm a Criminal Code offence thereby requiring every gun owner in Canada to obtain a firearms license under threat of serious jail time. Two million gun owners complied and now all their private and personal information including their addresses, the number and types of guns they own are on the RCMP’s leaky computer system. “How many times have criminals used untrustworthy police sources to pinpoint the location and type of gun they want to steal?” asked the NFA President.
“The old Firearms Acquisition Certificate (FAC) program was more effective at screening new firearm owners than the current licensing scheme that costs taxpayers at least eight times more each year to operate. As an added benefit the FAC system didn’t put private and personal information on vulnerable computers to be hacked, or violated by criminals and police personnel we trust to protect us,” concluded Mr. Clare.

For more information contact:
Blair Hagen, Executive VP Communications, 604-753-8682 Blair@nfa.ca
Sheldon Clare, President, 250-981-1841 Sheldon_Clare@shaw.ca
Canada’s NFA toll-free number - 1-877-818-0393
NFA Website: www.nfa.ca

yet another registry failure....

2011-08-17T13:50:00.000-07:00

An exceptional good piece by R. G. Harvie at the "Searching for Liberty Blog" regarding the recent murder of Jonathon Bacon and the pointlessness of laws that we have such as the gun registry.

In the middle of the summer holiday in Tourist Mecca Kelowna, B.C., at the Delta Grand Hotel, armed men in hoods jump out of an S.U.V. and start spraying bullets out of assault weapons at what appears to be rival gang members, reportedly killing one of them.

I was in Kelowna last summer.

Stayed at the Delta Grand, in fact. Very, very busy place.

So - it was with some sadness and shock that I read this morning that less than a year after my last visit, there are armed gang members shooting assault weapons at other gang members in the middle of the resort.

Just a few thoughts today:

a) How did this happen in the face of the National Gun Registry?

Doesn't the registry prevent people from shooting guns at other people? That's what Michael Ignatieff said as he paraded the shooting victims of KimV** Gill before the press (ignoring the fact that KimV**'s weapon was actually registered when he started shooting up Dawson College).

I'm assuming that these gangsters, when they stepped out of their SUV to commit murder were aware that we have a national gun registry. I'm assuming they realized, as they squeezed the trigger to shoot another human being, that there are strict penalties for possessing an unregistered firearm.

Definitely read the rest here

The CACP is not balanced (Open letter to Vic Toews)

2011-06-06T13:38:00.000-07:00

Mr. Toews,

The Canadian Association Of Chiefs Of Police president, Chief William Blair, has sought an invitation from you to participate in the Firearms Advisory Committee, claiming that his organization “would provide you with timely and balanced advice on firearms issues from the leading law enforcement organization in Canada.”

I should remind you that the CACP has been anything but balanced. While the CACP was praising Tasers to offset the negative press generated by their use, Taser International was making huge donations to the CACP’s lavish annual conferences along with CGI Group, the software company responsible for the gun registry’s computerized system.

More to the point, many among these Chiefs have publicly expressed their desire to ban guns and they have also consistently distorted the truth on this issue. At the height of the registry debate, a bogus study was released at a 1997 Chiefs of Police conference in Fredericton overstating the number of long guns “involved” in crime by a factor of 9 - including gun collections found during investigations where charges were never laid (i.e. a domestic complaint against a gun collector) or near but not involved with a crime or suicide.

The CACP claimed that 52% of firearms “found at crime scenes” or “in more than half of the criminal incidents” were rifles and shotguns. They continued to repeat this in press releases even after the RCMP objected to this interpretation of RCMP data, which actually showed that a majority of the long guns “involved” in those incidents were unrelated gun collections recovered during investigations that did not involve guns at all.

As late as January of 2004, CACP vice-president, Ottawa Police Chief Vince Bevan claimed that “these guns are commonly used in crimes” and “place police officers and citizens in danger every day”. CACP members Ottawa police Chief Brian Ford and Winnipeg’s Chief David Cassels (both known supporters of Canada’s anti-gun lobby) have gone so far as to say that the firearms were “used” in those incidents.

At a time when Toronto bureaucrats and their Liberal pals in Ottawa were pushing for a ban on handguns, Blair himself was instrumental in making sport shooters and collectors a pariah in Toronto and we saw some shaky statistics come from his office making it appear as though a majority of handguns used by Toronto thugs were taken from legal owners. To further drive home this message, Blair cooked up a plan called “Project Safe City”.

Did this plan target known thugs and convicted criminals? No, they looked up everyone who had expired licenses and searched their homes - eventually finding one miscreant engaged in illegal activities.

The CACP is not a balanced organization that would provide good advice on firearms issues. They are little more than a government funded lobby group that is more focused on political agendas than they are on public safety.

Barry Glasgow
Woodlawn, Ontario

printed from http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/37264

South African gun licensing system on "verge of collapse"..

2011-06-03T05:36:00.000-07:00

Hmmmm....Didn't Wendy have something to do with helping to set up South Africa's registration system?.....ARTICLE

De Wet Potgieter

The backlog in gun licence renewals is so severe that the entire application processing system is on the verge of “collapsing”, an investigation by The New Age has revealed.

Sources in the South African Police’s Central Firearms Registry (CFR), speaking on condition of anonymity, said that officials were battling to clear the backlog but new applications were coming in everyday.

With 200000 applications already received, and only 1000 being processed each working day, exhausted officers at the Saps’ Criminal Record Centre (CRC) in Pretoria say they are barely making a dent on the ever-growing backlog.

Last year, Safety and Security Minister Nathi Mthethwa, said in a response to a question posed in Parliament that there had been 1365203 applications for the renewal of firearm licences in terms of the new Firearms Control Act (Firearms Act) since it came into effect. Of these applications, 499043 had been approved, 15766 denied and 2009 are on appeal. This meant that almost 850000 were still to be processed.

Besides dealing with applications sent to them for checking by the CFR, the centre is also responsible for checking criminal records for courts countrywide. The CFR also handles all applications for police clearances needed by people for a variety of purposes, including liquor licences and work permit applications.

“The police already owe us 96 hours overtime,” a senior civilian official at the centre said. “But there is no light in the tunnel. The problem lies with management at the CFR, they do not know what is going on.”

In Gauteng alone, the CRC needs to process at least 6000 renewal applications for firearm licences if they hope to make headway in clearing the backlog, another source at the centre said.

“The police simply do not have the capacity to cope,” said a member of the gun lobby group, which has been engaging with government on the licencing debacle.

“The mess at the CRC has been common knowledge for quite some time and even though they claim that the process has speeded up, this is clearly not happening. The people at CFR responsible for the evaluation of applications are not up to standard for this kind of job.”

And, as the backlog grows, more and more irate gun shop owners, security companies and individual firearm owners are turning to the courts, leaving government to defend damages claims running into millions of rand.

Pretoria attorney Jaco Kruger has sold off his general law practice to focus exclusively on lawsuits brought against police because of the shambles in the firearms industry.

“I am handling an average of 30 new such cases every month,” said Kruger, who has already handled more than 200 cases against the police.

Kruger said his court applications cost the government an average of R20000 each to defend – and he has already taken 45 such cases to the courts, with all the rulings being in favour of his clients.

The Black Gun Owners Association also resorted to the courts last year following claims by its chairman, Abios Khoele, that the Firearms Control Act placed black South Africans at a huge physical, educational and economical disadvantage, especially those most likely to suffer from violent crime, as well as the poor and the aged.

Between 2004, when the firearms licencing laws were changed, and 2010, 900 gun shops have closed down and 10000 people have lost jobs, Khoele told a press briefing last year.

His association represents 700000 people – of all races.

Mountie loses cash, drugs, has illegal gun

2011-05-17T09:17:00.000-07:00

Mountie loses cash, drugs, has illegal gun

Docked 5 days pay for neglect of duty, discreditable conduct

By Gary Dimmock, Ottawa Citizen May 17, 2011

Const. Matt Wright's police work was anything but textbook the day he made an arrest in a street-level drugs and money bust.

The RCMP constable, a former military man, never fully documented the bag of pills and wad of cash he seized.

Then two months later, after working late at the Chilliwack, B.C. detachment, Wright, left with a box containing files, his notebooks, RCMP identification card, and the seized money and drugs.

He loaded the box into his personal vehicle and later that same night reported it had been stolen from his car. Everything was recovered, except the drugs and money. It is impossible to know what kind or the exact amount of drugs because they were never fully documented, nor was the cash. Wright says it was a bag of about 50 blue pills and a "thin wad" of cash, that contained at least one $20 note on the outside.

In an internal disciplinary ruling in Ottawa dated March 28, Wright, who admitted the allegations, was docked two days pay for neglect of duty.

"The lapse of judgment in the proper care, control and storage of an exhibit may be out of character; however, members must be vigilant in properly processing exhibits. The public and the courts expect nothing less than perfection," the disciplinary board ruled.

It wasn't the only problem the board had with Wright. In July 2007, months after he reported the missing drugs and money, the Mounties discovered he had purchased a rifle but didn't have a firearms certificate. Wright had purchased a 1973 Winchester RCMP Centennial rifle from a retired member in 2005. At the time, he asked a colleague to register it while he tried to get a firearms certificate.

Two years later, his supervisor learned Wright had a rifle in his possession that was not registered to him. And Wright still didn't have a firearms certificate.

His supervisor seized the gun and Wright was charged with disgraceful conduct under the RCMP Act. The constable was docked an additional three days pay for having a firearm without a licence. The disciplinary board stated: "We commit to uphold the law and by acquiring a firearm without the proper licensing, Constable Wright is breaking the very law he swore to enforce." Wright apologized to the disciplinary board and has shown remorse and regret for embarrassing the national police force. He also assured senior Mounties that he now processes crime exhibits "meticulously."

gdimmock@ottawacitizen.com

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Mountie+loses+cash+drugs+illegal/4794073/story.html#ixzz1Mc2bR6hd
__________________

What this article tells us is that away for the media spotlight, the police think the registry is a waste of time also.

CFC goofs on classification of re-registered firearm

2011-02-26T09:50:00.000-08:00

I put a Krinker Plinker kit on my 10/22 which makes it a restricted firearm due to the total over all length when the stock is folded. So I brought it to a reputable verifier who gave me a copy of all the paperwork and details (confirming that it is indeed restricted now). But when I got my new registration certificate in the mail from the CFC, it still says non-restricted.

Glad the CFC is on the ball... nothing gets by them!

89 year old harassed by the Registry

2011-02-18T05:33:00.000-08:00

Just venting here... But, I need to get this off my chest...

The background on this story... A little more than 2 years ago I helped a family friend sell off his firearms. I distinctly remember placing the adds here on CGN, receiving the offers from the potential new owners, running those offers by our family friend & helping him transfer EACH one to their new owners... I then helped him box them up & ship them to their new homes...

Tonight I get a phone call from him & he's worried about a letter the CFC just sent him... To paraphrase, it says because his firearm license has expired, he can no longer be in possession of the Nylon 66 that is STILL registered in his name!!! And it gives him several options to come into compliance... bla bla bla

What a complete CROCK! That gun was transferred to A NEW OWNER over 2 years ago!!!

Lucky for him, he says he kept the paperwork! Now I have to go over there & see just what paperwork he kept... Keep in mind that this gentleman is quite advanced in age & I'm unsure about exactly what paperwork he might have...

2 BILLION DOLLARS FOLKS!!! And not a single good thing has come out of this registry other than to hassel the law abiding segment of society!!!

Mountie-killer's guns not registered, inquiry hears

2011-01-19T09:42:00.000-08:00

Gee like who would have thunk, crimmanls ignoring laws......

Last Updated: January 18, 2011 4:48pm

EDMONTON — Notorious cop killer James Roszko was prohibited from owning guns when he fatally shot four Mounties, a fatality inquiry heard Tuesday.

And of the eight guns Roszko acquired, none were owned legally, the inquiry also heard.

"I think it's fair to say James Roszko had a wanton disregard for any (firearm) legislation," said RCMP Sgt. Dale Baumgartner, a gun-tracing expert.

Roszko had been under a court-ordered weapons prohibition when he fatally shot four Mounties on his Mayerthorpe property March 3, 2005.

Of the eight guns found on Roszko's property following the murders, three turned out to be stolen, while a fourth was smuggled into the country from the U.S.

Two others were either restricted or prohibited. None of the guns were registered.

article

Confiscation has always been a Liberal goal

2011-01-18T07:21:00.000-08:00

Update
The NRA advises they have been aware of this document for a long time, they have never been able to verify it completely so they have not used it. So you can’t really include it yet with other Liberal underhanded undertakings like, Adscam, Gun registry costs, etc, etc. nevertheless I hold that the main thrust of the document is true and fits the activities of the Liberal connected politicians, police forces and the Canadian Firearms Officers.

The more I know the more I despise the Liberal party. As an institution it needs to destroyed and the ground it was on needs to plowed and salted so it never springs forth again. Perhaps then a party might then form that has elements of honour and truth as it key virtues.
This document makes it clear why the registry is so important to them. Without it two things will happen, or more to the point two things won’t happen. First the world will not end, murders will not skyrocket, police and law abiding citizens will go about their daily lives just as before. At some point people will realize they have been fed lies about the value of the registry and they will be anger at it’s supporters and authors. What little trust they have for them will be wiped out and desire to believe their gun control claims will be nil.
2nd and more important, is that the goal of disarming Canadians will be set back generations, because fundamental that is the one and only purpose of the registry. Look at every instances of the setup of a firearm registry and you will see that it has been used for confiscation purposes or attempts have been made to do so.
Read this document, give it to all of your firearm owning friends, post it at gun ranges, make it clear to everyone who thinks this does not effect them, that it does. Yes you the duck hunter, target shooter are in their sights and have always been.

The Liberals have claimed confiscation of firearms was never their goal, but this document released in a Freedom of Information request shows that it was exactly their intent Read the rest of this disgusting piece at the Don't tread on me blog.

Recovered stolen guns

2011-01-16T16:49:00.000-08:00

A very good friend of mine who was in the process of tranfering a shotgun to me, an over and under Marlin model 90, in 16 ga, was informed by the registrar person that it had been reported as a stolen gun several years before, registered in his name some 6 years,at that time? he was paid a visit by the police, who took the firearm away, he purchased it originally from a dealer,depite many inquiries over the years, he has never been contacted again, or found out what the final disposition of the matter was??
And the beat go's on! regards Bully

From a CGN thread on the previous post

If a stolen gun fell in the forest, would the gun registry hear?

2011-01-16T16:41:00.000-08:00

MONTREAL—Vito Anobile snips the gray hairs of a long-time client and shakes his head. “It’s crazy,” the affable east-end Montreal barber says, scissors and comb balancing in each of his thrown-up hands. “Really crazy.”

What has Anobile, an avid hunter, both frustrated and mystified are the recent actions of Canada’s controversial gun registry.

The $70 million firearms program, (cough* 2 billion, cough*) including the gun registry, is supposed to protect the public by preventing the misuse of guns and controlling just who can get them and own them.

But the 68-year-old Anobile has a story that seems to call all of that into question.

His frustration has been building ever since last summer when the registry sent him a notice that someone was trying to register a shotgun. Anobile’s shotgun.

The only problem? It had been stolen 11 years before.

To make matters worse, despite Anobile’s repeated attempts to tell the registry the gun was stolen property, no one seemed to listen or understand.

The agency, for which the RCMP has responsibility, even assumed he had applied to transfer the weapon to the new owner.

“How could I transfer a stolen gun I don’t have, to someone I don’t know?” Anobile asks.

And for that matter, “How can a gun be registered 11 years after it was stolen?”

As all this was happening, the Conservative government, no fan of the long-gun registry, was making its most serious attempt yet to shut it down. Among the reasons? The government said it was simply ineffective.

And as hints of an election campaign grow, the registry is sure to be a major issue. After losing a razor-thin vote on the matter last September, the Conservatives are still vowing to scrap it.

“This is just one of many examples of how inaccurate and ineffective the long-gun registry continues to be,” said Candice Hoeppner, the Manitoba Tory MP whose anti-registry bill died in that vote, in an email to the Star.

Meanwhile, the RCMP released an evaluation last fall strongly supporting the registry. It said the registry protects officers by signalling the presence of guns in a dwelling, for instance. And it aids in many types of investigations. Police now heavily consult the registry.

Doctors and police chiefs point out that long-gun homicides are decreasing in Canada. (Handgun homicides, however, are on the rise.)

The story of Anobile’s gun begins on a frigid Sunday in November 1999. He returns from a hunting trip, leaving all his hunting gear, including his shotgun, a Beretta A-M-301 12-gauge, in his car. It’s a decision he’ll come to regret.

The next day, he visits his ailing 98-year-old father in Montreal’s Santa Cabrini hospital. When he returns to the parking lot, however, his Chevy Lumina is gone.

He reports the theft to the police. Three or four days later, he remembers, the police call to say the Lumina had been recovered. It had been used, they say, in a robbery at an east-end brasserie, and abandoned.

There’s no sign of the gun.

Eventually, Anobile’s insurance company replaces the gun with a new Beretta. And he hears nothing more on the subject.

Until last June.

The old gun resurfaces in a letter from the Canadian Firearms Registry, saying it had received a registration demand for the A-M-301. There’s no mention it had been stolen.

Anobile calls the registry. “They ask me if I sold the gun. I tell them, ‘No! It was stolen!’ ” They promise to open a file and investigate.

Then, in July, another letter. The exact same letter as in June. As if the previous communication never happened.

“I laughed because it was like they’re imbeciles,” Anobile says.

Then, in August, another letter. This time more specific, saying it has processed his application to transfer the gun to the new owner, who, an employee tells Anobile, lives in Brossard, a Montreal suburb.

Only he made no such application. “How could I have?” Anobile says. “It’s impossible.”

Reached by phone, an agent from the registry told the Star he had no idea where the gun has been all these years, or how it got in the hands of the new owner.

He also said that the police have decided to “overlook” the fact that it was stolen because the new owner appeared to have acquired it “in good faith.”

(So can I re-register a stolen car?)

An RCMP spokesperson said this type of situation “is quite common.”
“People who have their firearm stolen, and are compensated for the firearm through insurance, lose legal ownership of the firearm at that moment,” Sgt. Greg Cox wrote in an email.

“If the firearm is recovered, oftentimes the insurance company may take possession of the firearm and put it up for sale on consignment with a firearms dealer.”

So why the notices to Anobile? Why the assumption he had applied to transfer the firearm? And why didn’t the registry seem to know it was stolen?
We don’t know, because the RCMP refused to discuss Anobile’s case, for privacy reasons.

When it comes to stolen weapons, the RCMP argues the registry can help police find a stolen firearm’s rightful owner if it’s recovered.

For Anobile, it’s all very unnerving. “Did it kill 50 people in the last decade that we don’t know?”

“Something’s not working right,” he reasons. “For me (the registry) has been useless. It is there to create jobs, nothing more.”

“We are obliged to follow the law, but it’s not worth very much.”

The gun registry has been plagued by controversy ever since it was made into law by the government of then-Prime Minister Jean Chrétien in 1995.

There was severe criticism over cost overruns in the early years. And Canada’s auditor general in 2006 questioned how the registry is actually improving public safety.

The registry is only a small part of the firearms program, making up 1.6 to 4.8 per cent of overall costs, or about $2.5 million, according to a 2009 analysis for the RCMP. Don't bet on these figures, previous documents place it at around 79 million a year.

courtsey of the Toronto Star

Ten reasons gun registry must go

2010-11-16T05:29:00.000-08:00

Bill C-391 is designed to eliminate the ineffective and expensive long gun registry. And of the many witnesses supporting Bill C-391, few are as credible as Gary Mauser, a Professor Emeritus in criminology from Simon Fraser University who recently made a presentation before the House of Commons Public Safety Committee.

Mauser's presentation had one simple goal: to "show how claims made by the opponents of Bill C-391 are blatantly false or misleading" as outlined below. Mauser's entire presentation and supporting data, is on the website of the National Firearms Association, www.nfa.ca .

Claim No. 1: Access to a gun increases the risk of murder.

False: Canadian gun owners are less likely than other Canadians to commit homicide.

Claim No. 2: Rifles and shotguns are the weapons most likely to be used in domestic homicides.

False: The problem is the murder of family members, not the means of killing. Rifles and shotguns are not the weapons most likely to be used in domestic homicides. Knives are.

Claim No. 3: Spousal murders with guns have fallen threefold since the law passed, while spousal murders without guns have remained the same.

False: Spousal murders have slowly been declining since the mid-1970s. There is no empirical support for the claim that the long-gun registry has reduced spousal murders. The long-gun registry was not begun until 2001.

Claim No. 4: Stronger gun laws have helped reduce gun violence.

False: The rate of homicides committed with a firearm generally declined from the mid-1970s to 2002. This steady, long-term decline has been driven by economic and demographic changes. However, the use of firearms in homicide has increased since 2002.

Claim No. 5: Firearms stolen from legal owners are a significant source of crime guns. Registration is essential to prevent dangerous individuals from getting guns.

False: All studies of crime guns agree that stolen registered firearms are infrequently involved. It is the criminal record check, which is part of licensing, and certainly not registration, that stops criminals from getting guns legally. Bill C-391 will not change the current provisions for obtaining a firearms licence. Registration simply refers to the firearm, not the owner.

Claim No. 6: Firearms pose more problems in smaller cities where there are more gun owners.

False: Homicide is a particularly acute problem in large cities where ironically there are fewer legal gun owners.

Claim No. 7: The registry is an essential tool for police when taking preventative action and when enforcing prohibition orders to remove firearms from dangerous individuals.

False: The long-gun registry does not contain information on a gun's location. The registry only contains descriptive information about the registered guns.

In approaching dangerous situations, the police must assume there is a weapon.

Claim No. 8: The gun registry is consulted by police 10,000 times a day and provides important information.

False: Almost all of the "inquiries" are routinely generated by traffic stops or firearm sales and are not specifically requested, nor do police often find them useful. Almost all of these inquiries involve licensing, not the long-gun registry.

Claim No. 9: Polls show Canadians believe the gun registry should not be dismantled.

False: Two recent polls show that the public does not support the long-gun registry. This is consistent with at least 11 earlier polls, all of which have clearly demonstrated that the Canadian public has no faith in the long-gun registry or its ability to increase public safety.

Claim No. 10: Stronger gun laws have helped reduce gun-related death, injury, violence and suicide.

False. No properly designed study has been able to show that gun laws have been responsible for reducing criminal violence rates or suicide rates in any country in the world.

In sum, the test of any governmental program should be whether it meets its goals. In this case, the long-gun registry has failed.

sopuckrdATxplornet.com

via Winnipeg Free Press

Falsely accused of owning a Prohibted gun, do not pass Go, go directly to jail!

2010-10-29T21:04:00.000-07:00

I received a nasty call from the CFC years ago. The lady was irate on the phone as I apparently had a Smith and Wesson Model 19 with a 2" barrel registered to me and I was not not 12(6). The gun would have to be turned in for destruction as I was in criminal possession of a prohibited firearm without the proper endorsement on my PAL... After listening quietly to the lady I informed her I did not own a Model 19 with a 2" barrel. After about 30 minutes we established that the Model 19 belonged to some guy in BC and they had registered my 617 with a 6" barrel to him. Just a little error...

Another example is the crap I went through to register a AR15 lower received (stripped) as a complete 16" barreled rifle. Took six years for the change to go through, by the time it did I had sold the uppers and it was a stripped lower again. Sigh.

Got a registration slip in the mail for a SKS one day after purchasing a Russian SKS two weeks previous. The serial number did not match any of mine. Turns out the CFC mis-entered that serial. I got the correct SKS reg slip and all was good. 2 weeks later I bought a SKS with that same serial number, what are the odds?
__________________

150 year old gun owner?

2010-10-29T21:03:00.000-07:00

A friend of mine (who will remain nameless), who i've bought a pistol from.

He buys out entire estates where firearms are involved and then sells them off for a profit.

He called in to inquire about a pistol that was in a certain estate. Apparently it wasn't registered to the (now dead) owner of the estate. They also apparently had 2 certificuts listed in their system for it but wouldn't tell the person who possessed it now the information. It was then apparently flagged to be destroyed.

After a long bout and numerous phone calls, he was able to identify the 'original' owner of the pistol. Lots of paperwork indicated it was sold to 2 different people and then to the dead estate owner. All of this got faxed in.

What my friend asked of the CFC, "So what your telling me is there was a pistol in your database, with 2 entries, and at least one was registered to a 150 year old man. At no point did any of you wonder how someone could be alive after 150 years legally owning a pistol."

So the moral of the story, even if there is a firearm listed to someone with a birth date of 1900, the CFC wouldn't recognize this as a situation that required someone to at least look at.

Thousands of ghost guns registered to business!

2010-10-29T21:01:00.000-07:00

I remember hearing that the record for "ghost guns" was held by an auctioneer in Alberta. He was getting close to retirement and was winding up the business. He contacted the RCMP to talk about handing back his firearms business license and winding up his business and discovered that he still "had" several THOUSAND guns in his inventory.

All of them were sold and legally transfered and the new owners probably all had valid reg certs, but they had not removed them from his file. (I understand that this was common under the old "green sheet" system).

The NFA had a story of a legal case where a guy in the maritimes (a cop no less) was charged because he had allegedly moved, changed his address and moved a handgun without authourisation. Turned out at trial that there were three existing reg certs, one for him at his old address, one for a gun dealer to whom he had at one time consigned it, and the current reg cert that HE HAD IN HIS POSSESSION for HIS NEW ADDRESS, but that the RCMP had no record of in THEIR files (again, this was under the "old" system).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gun never transferred, despite paperwork saying so.

2010-10-29T21:00:00.000-07:00

I just asked for a re-issue of all my registration certificates, to make sure CFC was up-to-date on my files (without the lengthy wait for a FOI request).

APPARENTLY I STILL OWN A BERETTA 686 THAT I TRANSFERRED IN 2008!

I am LOOKING at the TRANSFER NOTIFICATION (SELLER) FROM THE RCMP, SAYING THE TRANSFER IS VALID! It is literally IN MY HANDS right now.

Needless to say, first thing Monday the CFC is getting a phone call to resolve this - and if they don't, then they'll be dealing with one angry fellow. When the transfer is approved, and complete, and I have a NOTICE of same... WHY is this gun still on my record???

2 guns from one....

2010-10-29T20:58:00.001-07:00

My FN FAL has a serial number on the upper and a serial number on the lower. The registry, in its infinite wisdom decided to list both serial numbers on the reg cert. So now, I could split that rifle in half, get another unregistered FN and swap out the upper and lower and end up with two rifles legally registered to a single reg cert.

No, I have NOT done this. But in theory I could.
-------------
Here are my two stories says Paulz

1. Similar to Suputin, I have a "mixmaster" FN. With an AR-15, the lower receiver is the "firearm", in the FN it is the upper. My reg cert lists the serial number on the lower. In theory, I may be legally liable for having an unregistered prohib, since the serial number on the upper (the "legal" firearm), is not the same as what is written on the reg cert.

2. Bought a Browning Cittori O/U shotgun from a guy at my club. Had infinite trouble (both he and I) getting it transfered. The serial number on the reg cert did not match the serial number on the gun. The nice lady at the CFC explained that the serial number should be a certain number of letters and numbers and should be located by the safety on the tang. The number on the reg cert had no letters whatsoever.

After much discussion, and search on the gun, we finally found a number stamped on the gun (hidden under the foreend) that matched the number on the reg cert. Note that the number on the reg cert was on the barrel, which is made to be easilly disassembled from the gun, and was probably a batch number or possible originally from another gun.

Now, in theory, the RCMP could (again) have charged me with illegal possesion, since the gun and its actual serial number did not show up in the database. In other words, my gun was officially no the gun on the reg cert. Likewise, if at any point in the past it had been stolen, there would be no way to trace it or prove it was stolen.

Lost data, wrong serial number, harrassment by the SQ

2010-10-29T20:56:00.000-07:00

I have had 2 issues with the registry.

1) called them up to setup a transfer. The firearm I wanted to sell was not listed. So a quick search with the lady on the phone found that
- I had 4 different owner accounts. Each had some error in name, address, phone numbers, ...
- 1 rifle I have was not on record, 3 rifles they had on record I did not own, 1 was registered with the wrong serial number (I sent all the paper work 3 times before they got it right)

2) that was before the long gun registry, I owned a 92FS. I first got it while I was in the army. Having a range on the base, and my home address was the base, they did not issue me a transport certificate (I did send all the paper work, THEY decided not to issue). Years later, I get called by the f***** SQ about those 2 years period where I had a handgun but no transport permit. I got such calls every 6-12 months for 3 years, at which point I sold the damn thing.

Just gotta love registries...

Stolen guns reregistered again and again

2010-10-29T20:52:00.000-07:00

Critics of the national gun registry expressed outrage yesterday after the Ontario Provincial Police seized a gun that had been reported stolen over a decade ago but had remained in circulation by evading three separate registry checks. The failure of the registry to spot the stolen gun could have wrongly implicated a future owner, critics said. Police took possession of the gun, a Browning .30-06 single-shot rifle, at a store in Orillia, Ont., about 100 kilometres north of Toronto.

The weapon had been reported stolen in Quebec in 1992. The national registry had both the model and registration number of the stolen weapon on file. In May, an Ontario man brought the gun with its registration papers, to Ellwood Epps Sporting Goods in Orillia, to sell, said the store manager Wes Winkel. Mr. Winkel then called the Canadian Firearms Centre and was given a number that acknowledged transfer of ownership. He then registered the weapon himself. On June 29, when Mr. Winkel went to sell the gun, he was told he could not receive authorization. This week, he was told it had been reported stolen. RCMP said the registration papers Mr. Winkel originally received when he purchased the weapon were legitimate.

Mr. Winkel said he couldn't understand why the registration system did not identify the gun as stolen on the three earlier checks. The slips could have led to the arrest of an innocent owner who would have tried to register the weapon without knowing its history, he said. "It's unbelievable," he added. "How many people are out there with stolen guns?"

Dennis Young, a spokesman for Saskatchewan Canadian Alliance MP Garry Breitkreuz, also expressed incredulity that the gun had remained on the street. "This is proof positive of their total incompetence," Mr. Young said of the registry staff. Mr. Breitkreuz has led opposition to the registry, often criticizing it as a waste of money. A spokesman for Wayne Easter, the Solicitor-General, could not be reached for comment.

==========

Gun-laundering registry a farce: One billion dollars a big investment for a national firearms lost and found
Sunday 13 July 2003

p. A14

Wes Winkel, the manager of Ellwood Epps Sporting Goods in Orillia, Ont., -- "For all your hunting, shooting, fishing and camping needs" -- says "OPP officers were laughing their heads off," when they came this week to confiscate a hunting rifle from his store, just "two minutes north of Weber's barbeque restaurant," on Route 11.

OPP stands for Ontario Provincial Police, the force that polices rural Ontario the way the RCMP polices much of Alberta outside the big cities.

The rifle had been listed in the RCMP's national crime computers since it was reported stolen in Quebec in 1992. Still, the Liberals' national gun registry had registered it not once, nor twice, but three times. On the fourth, someone at the registry finally got around to matching the rifle to the RCMP's list of heisted guns and prevented its re-registration; actually, its re-re-re-registration. LEGAL REGISTRATION NO. 1

A customer first brought the rifle to Ellwood Epps Sporting Goods in May, wanting to sell it. Winkel bought it and the customer gave him the gun's registration papers, which the RCMP said Friday were legitimate.

Sometime before May the customer had bought the gun and registered it himself, even though the serial number matched one in the Mounties' stolen-goods database.

LEGAL REGISTRATION NO. 2

Winkel then called the Liberals' gun registry in Miramichi, N.B., and, as required by law, registered it to the sporting goods store, the gun's new owner. The registration went through without so much as a hiccup.

LEGAL REGISTRATION NO. 3

An avid hunter, Winkel then bought the gun for himself in late June and, again, registered it without incident.

Far from keeping Canadians safe from gun crime, far from encouraging gun owners to lock up their guns ever more securely so as to discourage criminals from stealing guns to use in robberies, far from inducing a "culture of safety," the Liberals' registry is now laundering stolen guns -- giving stolen guns legitimate pedigrees and the proper papers to go along with them.

When CanWest News broke this story on Friday, no spokesman could be found for Solicitor General Wayne Easter. So the country was denied the pleasure of the government's weasel-word excuse for a "hot" gun slipping through their allegedly airtight security blanket three times without detection.

But let me hazard a guess of what the Liberals will say Monday about this embarrassing flaw in their vaunted, billion-dollar gun registry. They'll proclaim: "Look how well the registry worked! It actually identified a stolen gun and took it off our streets, thereby making Canada and Canadians safer."

Good thing the registry got four chances to "work" so well, though.

If, at any earlier juncture in this story, any of the gun's three legal owners -- the original customer, Epps Sporting Goods or Wes Winkel -- had decided to hold on to the gun, then a stolen rifle would be out there with all the legal documents necessary to stay in circulation forever.

But once Solicitor General Easter or his spokesthingy has put the best possible face on this gross incompetence, we will still be left with the question "How has this made Canadians any safer?"

It is never a bad thing when property is returned to its rightful owner. But returning it doesn't make Canadians safer: Stolen goods don't commit robberies; robbers do. Attempting to stop robberies by controlling stolen goods is putting the cart before the horse.

One billion dollars also seems a frightful price to pay for a sort of national lost and found for firearms.

If taxpayers are going to fork over a billion for an elaborate tracking system so gun owners can enjoy a greater chance of seeing guns returned after they've been stolen, then why not half a billion for a national stamp collection registry, or $2 billion for a car stereo registry or a quarter billion for a Royal Dalton figurine database?

Easter and the other supporters of the Liberals' registry also claim the registry will encourage legal owners to lock up their guns better, so criminals will have a harder time finding guns. Right. Just the way registering cars and locking them up prevents thieves from stealing them.

Guns stolen from homes have never been a major source of weapons used in gun crimes, despite Ottawa's claims. The fact that handguns are now the murder weapon in nearly two-thirds of firearm murders in Canada proves that.

Handguns have been subject to registration since 1934 and to tight ownership control since 1977. Yet in just the past decade, handgun murders, as a percentage of total murders committed with firearms, have more than doubled to over 60 per cent.

The last time Statistics Canada compiled numbers in this way -- in 1991 -- of all the murders committed in the entire country, the number committed with handguns that were once legally owned and registered in Canada, but no longer in the possession of their registered owner, was three.

Smuggling is the main source of Canada's crime guns -- not theft from private Canadian homes or sporting goods stores. Yet Ottawa puts almost no resources into stopping smugglers while putting a billion into harassing law-abiding duck hunters.

Now, far from helping reduce gun crime by forcing every one to register, Ottawa is helping register stolen guns.

No wonder the OPP officers were laughing. The registry is a farce.

Lorne Gunter
Columnist, Edmonton Journal
Editorial Board Member, National Post

26 Ghost guns a year at one store!!!!!!

2010-10-29T20:50:00.000-07:00

A firearms dealer ran a check. He asked Ottawa for a list of all registered firearms that Ottawa thought were in his store. The list, when it arrived, included over 200 firearms that were not in his store – ghost guns. He learned that ghost guns were accumulating in his store at an average of 26 firearms a year. All the ghost guns had been legally sold and correctly transferred – but the government’s sloppy firearms control system often failed to delete the record that the firearm was owned by the dealer and located in his store. He “had” over 200 guns, shown in Ottawa’s records as being in his store that were not actually there. He laboriously proved to Ottawa that every one of them was gone, and settled back, satisfied that he had solved the problem. He hadn’t. He ran the same exercise again, a few years later. This time there were even more ghost guns registered to his store. The dealer gave up. He keeps his own records, and has no faith in Ottawa’s records

Still your gun? But I sold it years ago!!

2010-10-29T20:48:00.000-07:00

It's crap. Traded a pistol to a dealer then when I requested new certs it was still in my name 8 months later....oh and as a cop, never assisted in any investigation. They don't even return calls half the time, the other half they have no info. Waste of money.

Gun Registry made of Swiss cheese?

2010-10-29T20:46:00.000-07:00

According to them, the Swiss Arms Classic Green Carbine only comes in 454mm (17.9" barrel). The only Swiss Arms with a 363mm (14.3" barrel) is the Black Special.

Deregistering destroyed gun takes years

2010-10-29T20:33:00.000-07:00

A personal problem I had, years ago I blew up an Enfield. Yeah, it can happen. Anyways, I stripped it and took the barreled reciever to the police station where I was told they would take care of everything. Years went by before it was finally de-registered and out of my name.

Stolen guns and the Keystone cops don't bother recovering them

2010-10-29T20:31:00.000-07:00

Well to make a long story short here goes. Had all my guns stolen in a home burglary one month before the mandadorty registration came into effect. I provided descriptions and serial numbers along with some photos of ALL my firearms. I gave the list to the city police the rcmp and my insurance group.

None were ever found. I phoned the registration center right after it was up and running to make sure they had a record of the serial numbers in case some douchebag tried to register. They told me NO!!! So I guess I have to wait for the thief to register them.

Six years after the fact I had my buddy call me at 10 in the evening to tell me one of my guns was advertised for sale in the Saskatoon star pheonix!! He knew it was mine as I had built it and engraved it so on the barrel. The retarded thief figured that must mean something and put it in his advertisement!!! Remember this is after the registration has been in full swing. I notified the rcmp and the city police and my insurance group. I got the guys name who bought it and phoned him to tell him what was going on. This was one week after I notified the police and no one had contacted him a week later!!! Man was I pissed!!It took the police 3 friggen months to litteraly cross the street to pick the gun up from the poor old guy who bought it. I did end up with it after I was investigated for fraud.........makes you wonder who the criminal really is.I think you can see the registration worked for me despite my best attempts. Enter sarcasm.

Also the police followed the sale of the gun back 5 owners and no one was ever charged.

Freedom of Information request gone wrong

2010-10-29T20:27:00.000-07:00

How about I put in an Freedom of information act request for my records and got mine + another poor guys in Barrie Ontario!

mapleleaf eh says: Ditto. I bought a rifle and sold to another fellow. I also got personal home addresses for a dealer.

Ghost firearms for Halloween!

2010-10-29T20:24:00.000-07:00

A friend of mine did a request for the info in his file:

-4 guns he never owned were registered to him, 2 prohibited.

-1 he sold was still registered to him 3 years after selling it.

-1 gun he did own had no record of registration, despite the fact he had the registration certificate in his hand.

A few years back I received a notice of transfer for an SKS rifle which I have never owned. The following week I received a certificate for an SKS that I never bought. I mailed all the paperwork back stating I personaly boycott communist POS firearms and would appreciate they update my file accordingly!

I've also received certificates for Colt Single Action Armys I wished I did have LOL and to this day get pestered about a Model 69 Winchester 22 rifle I supposedly purchased at an auction.

Colt 41 says: Same here. Found at least two guns registered to me I never bought.

7 years to correct a serial number?

2010-10-28T22:13:00.000-07:00

It took approx 7 yrs to correct a serial number error on my registration certificate. I purchased a 10/22 Sturm Ruger-non restricted, registered by Dealer and took it home with temp regs. 3 weeks later, received the official registration paperwork and by chance noticed incorrect serial number 1 yr later, attempted contacts CFC by phone over 2 months, busy signals xx no contact made, wrote 2 letters over a period of 2 yrs to advise them of their error. They completely ignored my attempts to follow the law. For 7 yrs, I could have been arrested for not having the correct registration for a firearm. I kept all copies of my letters and records of attempted phone calls in case something would happen. In total, 7yrs later, the correct registration papers were received. If registration is so important, why did they wait 7 yrs to have the correct serial number of a firearm? I guess it's not important.
John 10/2010

Non-registerable, maybe yes, maybe no, your risk....

2010-10-28T20:09:00.000-07:00

We have manufactured some lowers to accept the Ferret and Safe Harbor 50 BMG uppers in order to make these non restricted. The Uppers require modification that is non reverseable to make them fit our lower. We submitted a finished unit to the RCMP lab and they determined that our lower, which has a model and serial number was NOT a lower, but rather a trigger group that does not require registering.
So now we are in a position of supplying fully operational 50 BMG rifles that are non registerable.
I am EXTREMELY hesitant to sell 1 for fear t5hat someone will get checked for registration and then the legal system will be tested at my expense.

For legislation that was "not going to interfere with business" guess what, IT IS interferring with business!!

No Ma'am there was no registry in 1873

2010-10-28T19:35:00.000-07:00

Had a similar one recently. I bought an old SxS shotgun made in 1873. The thing was previously registered and I had the reg cert. Call to make the transfer and they are all worried about the make and model and markings on the gun.

I said, "the gun is already registered, just put the stuff that is on the old certificate on the new certificate".

I had to remind them that as there was no gun registry in 1873, the maker didn't see fit to mark the gun in a manner acceptable to the modern registry. They just don't seem to get that at all.

Sawed off or not?

2010-10-28T19:30:00.000-07:00

Legally purchased a Remington 870 that was previously registered and transfered into my name.
6 months later I received a notice by mail that the shotgun was being confiscated as I do not hold a prohib license and they re-classified my shotgun.
The claim was I "sawed" off the barrel.
The shotty was previously registered and transferred with no issues but some how the magical registry detected that I sawed the barrel down.
I can't prove I didn't they can't prove I did, but registry trumps.
With little help from the NFA or CSSA other than advice to buy a new barrel and get the CFO to inspect it. I did so and am now in the clear, but my old barrel that was "sawed off" was confiscated and destroyed.
Anyone with less of a fighting spirit than me would have lost the whole gun, I just lost a lot of money and time is all. Whole situation prolly took years off my life.
Magnum Peanut

Colin:
I think this might have been one of the shotguns modified illegally by the SQ and then sold off as surplus, the SQ did not have the correct authority to modify barrels.

Fabrique Nationale does not make guns, claims CFC!

2010-10-28T17:17:00.000-07:00

I just bought a Spanish Mauser short rifle from another member here. Mauswer 1893, refurbed into a 1916 civil guard rifle. Funny, but when i completed the transfer, the girl on the phone said "Ok, so it's a 98k?" No...it's not....
mwjones 10/2010

I've seen it first hand. A friend tried to register a 270 winchester. He gave them the S/N off the receiver and was told "that must be wrong, we already have that S/N on file for another rifle". He now has..or had the gold sticker with the "new" S/N.
wolfen 10960

Now, I have an example of why the registry is a joke.

I recently purchased a FN (Fabrique Nationale) SxS Shotgun through an add in the local Buy and Sell. The firearm was already registered and once we agreed on a price a transfer had to be made(The next morning of course, it was a Wednesday evening!).

He called to make the transfer and had problems right away. He told them the make of the rifle and the Firearms Officer told him straight out that Fabrique Nationale was not a Firearms manufacturer and he had better tell them what type of gun it really was or it would not be transferred!

Keep in mind this firearm was already registered!!
After 10 more minutes of arguing with the officer they finally said "Ohhh, it is an FN make then right? We have that manufacturer on our list" On their list?? So if it's not on their list you can't register it I guess....even if it is already registered?

Then they asked for a model number. There was no model number on the firearm and the existing registry card did not have model number either. I am not sure what they decided on for a model number but finally a transfer was made after some more arguing over the phone.

All this for a 12 Gauge SxS shotgun with 30" barrels! Hardly a threat to anyone in my opinion.

Thanks Firearms Registry for making our taxpayers dollars feel like they are well spent.

Rifle or shotgun?

2010-10-28T17:04:00.000-07:00

Had a similar experience. I tried to register a .22 shotgun, they insisted it was a rifle. I tried to point out that the gun is smoothbore,has only a bead for a sight and was sold as a shotgun,but to no avail. Spent 2 nights on the phone with them.
papaclaude

Not sure if I would call it an epic failure but arguing about the model number with the cfc while the firearm is laying on your lap certainly ranks a fail in my mind.
LRA

Rex Murphy "The Useless Canadian Gun Registry"

2010-10-28T13:59:00.000-07:00

What can I say that Rex can't say better

Rules to live by and far to many letters

2010-10-28T13:44:00.000-07:00

I received two letters from RCMP yesterday. The first one stated a transfer was being held up as additional information was needed and to call by a certain date. The second one stated the transfer was complete and I could give the purchaser the firearm.
Purchaser received a similar pair of letters as well.
-- BillR

when it comes time to register 58 unregistered rifles, do it in small separate batches. The reason is that if there is some sort of problem (eg a duplicate serial number) then everything in the batch is held up until the problem is resolved. By registering in small batches you may end up with say one batch delayed but the rest of the registrations will come through. Also if one batch does not come through, be sure to phone and check on progress. When there are hangups, registration applications appear to sit on the bottom of the pile and be forgotten --- at least that has been my experience
-- mooncoon

if you have firearms with no serial numbers, the sticker rule no longer applies. You no longer need to affix the sticker and I was never even provided any. Also, speaking from experience, if you have multiple firearms with no serial numbers, register each of those separately unless they are all the exact same firearm otherwise. If you have a bunch of firearms that are all the same (you mentioned a crate of enfields), register those all together. It will go much faster that way and your certificates will easier to sift through.
-- thebigslide

Is that a Pistol or a rifle in your pocket?

2010-10-28T13:42:00.000-07:00

I have a rfle from the 60s with no serial number on it too. I asked them about it during the transfer, and the girl told me that it's common for guns to have the same serial number or no number. She told me that they would send em a sticked to put on it. It never came, and even if it did, i would not have put it on. Who wants to junk up their nice guns with gaudy stickers?
-- mwjones

I once registered a rifle to my name.... lady asked for serial number..... lady said.. ''Sir, that serial number belongs to a Smith& Wesson .38 revolver''...... I replied, ''is there only one dog named Fido ???''
-- simonyzer

I had a Pistol and a rifle both with the same serial number.. I got a reprint of my certificates at one point.. and found they have the same certificate number... One had the right make and the other had the right length for the rifle.I called asked how this was possible.... They said they would figure it out..
A couple weeks later I get two stickers with no explanation and when I call to find out what they are for they say it's so I can tell them apart...
I said I can tell them apart one of them is about 12 inches long and the other about 3 feet.. Another couple weeks go by and I get a couple new certificates...We find out that someone apparently used cut and paste.. I got the right certs eventually. I sold the rifle... Only took another 2 years to get the stickered certs cancelled..
-- bear.23

Address changed by registry

2010-10-28T13:40:00.001-07:00

I was in the local gun shop a week ago and a older fellow was purchasing a new rifle. The gun shop called up the registry office with his info / PAL etc, and determined that he could not register his new rifle to his residence in thunder bay because according to their records, he lives in Toronto!
- He had not lived in Toronto since early 1970's pre FAC
- He has lived at his current address for 6 years
- He had registered his other firearms to his current address when he moved there.
- Somehow, the registry changed his address to his very old one, without his knowledge or consent.
That is some superior technology we have there.
-- Archie Perry

10 years later gun disappears from registry

2010-10-28T13:37:00.000-07:00

So, little background here before I start. About 10 years ago I bought a rifle from a gunsmith in my hometown, a few weeks later I get the registration certificate. Nothing out of the ordinary for the next 10 years until now. Today I called the CFC because I was selling said gun, and there’s the bomb, apparently the said gun does not exist, even after I gave the nice lady the certificate number and gun serial number. And the best part is, apparently that sort of thing happens often. anybody here surprised at that??
-- gaudzy

Ghost firearms, long transfers, etc

2010-10-28T13:28:00.000-07:00

I had a Ruger 10/22 LR, registered with the wrong serial number on the registration card. Tried to advise the CFC of their error, after numerous attempts (buisy signals phone calls, 2 letters over 2 yrs), it took approx. 5 yrs for the CFC to send me a revised registration card. I kept all my paperwork in case I was stopped by Police. What could I have done, I called them xxx, wrote them xx, having correct registration/serial numbers were not a priority to them??? Registration saves lives?, I don't think so!
-- bush24

The CFC still has a restricted firearm registered to me that I never owned...a site sponsor sold me a restricted firearm and accidentally transferred two of the same model to me even though I ordered and recieved only one. The vendor immediately corrected the mistake on their end, we re-transferred this "ghost" firearm back to them, and still, even though I have the paperwork showing it was transferred back to the vendor, it came up as registered to me during a recent discussion with the CFC. At this point, the CFC database has no credibility whatsoever...
-- shootemup

I recently had a new barrel installed on a rifle.
It wound up being longer than original. I did my homework and research and since the rifle was originally purchased in the mid 90's there was already record of it so i did as i figured was the right thing. I contacted the local RCMP Firearms office, asked what i needed to do, she said come down, have it measured and verified to correct the original dimensions. I figured no problem, this isn't so bad.
Your registry paper work says barrel length is greater than whatever the default measurement is on that form, but they have record of the exact length which makes me wonder right there why our own paper work can't have the correct data.
Second, she proceeded to screw together a metal cleaning rod to insert it in the end of my new Krieger barrel, i said "no, no..............you won't be doing that, " luckily I had my wooden dowel emergency measuring stick with me, i took care of that myself.
Ok, so, all this was fine and dandy, no big deal.
So, she proceeded to verify all information, guess what , they didn't have the correct serial number that was on the rifle.
So for 15 years i had in my possession A rifle that belonged to no one. What if I ever had been stopped and their records on file indicate that wasn't my firearm? Would that have been an expensive and nightmarish situation. not any fault of my own. Can't imagine how bad this could have got.
-- Kelly Timoffee

I purchased a P-38 from Tradex as a "collectors piece", took EIGHT MONTHS before they approved the transfer!-- Griffoneur

Lost transfer request

2010-10-28T13:25:00.000-07:00

I had to do a transfer today and decided to ask about my transfer for a MP40 that was started on June 4th. The woman said there was nothing in the system and told me that the dealer did not do it.

I ran over to the dealer and got the reference number and called back. I called back to the CFC and got someone else who told me that the transfer was started on June 4th but got misplaced and did not get sent to the Ontario CFO for background checks and approval. He did say they screwed up.

He told me he will send it for approval and it was a good thing that I called because it just would have sat. I guess this is a reminder to keep on them. He also said that it is now a 4-6 WEEK WAIT for RESTRICTED transfers.

I decided to call the CFO's office myself to ensure it was sent. Talked to a very nice lady and let her know the situation and she got it approved while I waited on the phone. The firearm retailer called me 20 mins later to pick it up.

What a system, but the system has some great and understanding people.

Paper Crimmanls

2010-10-28T13:21:00.000-07:00

See this is exactly why we need to get rid of the non restricted registry; way too many screw ups. I've had trouble transferring 2 non restricted rifles, one I had for over a year before they called me and told me the registration was no good. I had a registration in my name with all the proper info but for some reason it was no good so I had to track down the seller after well over a year and redo everything and it still took several tries to get it right for them to issue a new cert. People don't understand the process half the time and it causes problems, misinformation and sometimes paper criminals.-----------

Upon checking my registration certificates, I noticed the Firearms Center had made a error on my rifle serial #, I hadn't noticed it for approx. 1 yr due to numbers (something like) 088-080 mixed up. I wrote the CFC a letter asking them to correct the registration, numerous phone calls (all busy signals), no progress. Waited a couple more months, wrote another letter (registered) with photocopies of my PAL, Certificates and original bill of sale. Finally recd the corrected certificate about 5 months later? If registration is that important, then why did it take them so long to correct a "criminal" matter?
-- Bush24

Russian Nagant revolver, registered as a German Sig pistol

2010-10-28T13:18:00.000-07:00

yes I have an enfield that they sent me 2 different registrations for,
one had the correct serial number listed as an Enfield
and the other had a little number sticker and a manufacturer name (GlobeCo)

I also have a No1MKIII* that was registered as a No1MkII*

And a Nagant M91/24 that has the manufacturer listed as SIG

The registry is full of errors

(Sig has never made a Revolver to my Knowledge, Colin)

Gun registry missing data

2010-10-28T11:29:00.000-07:00

The registry is full of every error possible. Just last week one of my co-workers reported a change of address, and found that only two of his five registered guns are in the database. He has accurate registration cards for all five, but only two are still in the system. All are guns purchased new in the last four years. Just another example of our tax dollars hard at work.

-------

Bought a shot gun a few years back, it was registered at the time (from a licensed dealer).

Swapped it back to him two years later (for a more expensive one!). He phoned me to double check it was registered because there was no record of it in the system. I faxed him the cert. which he in turn gave all the info to CFC. They could not ever find a trace

------

I've seen dealers trying to transfer a gun they have in their hand that the CFC says doesn't exist so they won't help, and they wonder why guns disappear out of the system !?!?!?!

Registration sent to wrong person

2010-10-28T11:27:00.000-07:00

I once received the registration document for a shotgun owned by a fellow in Ontario. Seems they slipped it into the envelope with the correct registration for a shotgun I had just bought. Fortunately that was just a misdirected document, not something that created any responsibility or liability for me.

Same gun registered twice

2010-10-28T11:20:00.000-07:00

I purchased a Remington 597 VTR two months ago, received the registration card in the mail a couple weeks later and all seemed just as per normal. Today, the mail came with another registration card. At first I assumed that they just double printed it and mailed it off again and didn't think much more about it.
A few hours later I thought I'd just double check the info on the card out of curiosity. While comparing the all the info I noticed that the last 2 numbers on the serial number were different and incorrect on the new card that came.

------

Congratulations, you are now the legally registered owner of, and therefore liable and responsible for, a firearm that you don't have, can't find, and can't produce for inspection if they ever want proof that you didn't give/sell/lend it to someone who isn't allowed to have one. If you are lucky, no 597 actually exists with that serial number, so no one can get up to no good with it while it is registered to you. If the CFC doesn't accept your explanation, your best bet may be to report it lost or stolen.

If an officer thinks you are breaking the law you are breaking the law!

2010-10-28T11:18:00.000-07:00

If an officer thinks you are breaking the law you are breaking the law!

A couple of my shooting buddies got in a pile of crap because of a bunch of shotgun hulls rolling around the back of their pickup. A cop spotted them at a road check and six hours of later they were on their way. We know that shotgun hulls are not ammunition but not everyone knows that.

There is now a Policy in BC that firearms are to be seized whenever there is a domestic dispute.

The police seize under the public safety laws. Note that there is usually no 'hot pursuit' and a warrant is required to enter a private residence unless there is immanent danger.

This policy, of course, won't hold up in court.

Now the nightmare.

Man gets in shouting match with teenage son
Nosey neighbor calls cops.
Cops show up and question parents and kids separately.
Cops ask to see his guns
WTF he asks. There was no fight. Wife verifies this.
Cops seize guns as a matter public safety.
Oops - pistols do not have trigger locks (pistols in a vault)
Unsafe storage charge.
Loose ammo in drawer
Unsafe storage charge
...... 8 BS charges later guns are gone
He gets lawyer next day finds out guns will be destroyed in 60 days
45 days later he gets a hearing
Destruction stayed until trial.
14 MONTHS!!! later the trial is delayed again
The crown offers to stay all charges but one unsafe storage charge. His record will be cleared after 6 months probation, community service and retake the safety courses. This is upon approval from the judge of course.
Lawyer recommends that he take the deal as the trial costs will get 'prohibitive'
2 MONTHS later this mess gets before the judge.
The judge allows for the guns to be released to me for safe keeping until his probation is over. Caveat - I have 60 days to get transfer the guns
Next day I go to the RCMP to initiate the transfers.

Here's where my involvement begins

All of his guns were 'stored' in a plastic garbage can.
Three guns were re-registered with the wrong serial number - won't transfer
Two semi-auto guns re-registered as bolt action - won't transfer
One pump action shotgun re-registered with wrong barrel length and classification (I guess phosphate=military=restricted) - won't transfer
One Bolt action with barrel length off by over an inch - won't transfer
I should add that the exhibits officer was beside himself as this makes his life miserable. The irony is that the Certs were seized along with the guns but the officer decided to re-verify rather than look up the cert info.
The rest of the guns went off without a hitch.
57! days later the paperwork came through and I got the guns released to me.

He gets his guns back in January 2010 (if the paperwork shows up).

So no laws broken but policy cost my friend thousands in legal fees and me couple hundred man hours of paperwork.

The police were going to seize his guns no matter what, but the BS charges came along because he was messy/didn't have a copy of the regs handy.

Without the BS charges this process would have taken a mere 6 months! (I've done this a few times)

I keep copies of the RCMP regulation pamphlets in my car and in my vaults. And I keep all of my ammo neatly stored on shelves and reloads in plastic ziplock bags which I 'file' in cardboard boxes.
I take my loose ammo to the range in a shooters bag with a reg pamphlet in the side pocket.

Never try to bash a cop over the head with the law. Assist his decisions with RCMP/CFC documentation.

.

The RCMP can enter directly into the Reg database.
This created two records for the same gun. The original (correct) record is marked as cancelled so the new (incorrect) record is used for the transfer.
The exhibits officer and I verify the firearm and fill out the form. If the info does not match what the police officer entered the transfer won't go through. The incorrect record has to be fixed and getting a reg. cert changed is not easy.

I'm just glad I was not involved in clearing the Non-restricted, full auto, .308cal Jumble Enfield Mk 111 with no serial number [Which of course can not exist -- lots of errors there].

Long time coming

2010-10-28T11:14:00.000-07:00

The last day you had to register your guns (Dec 31-2003 I think?) a friend submitted a registration online for a .22 rifle. He waited and waited, and just sort of forgot about it for a bit, since the rifle was sitting in a gun safe locked up in my closet and he wasn't shooting anymore... He kept a copy of the confirmation that the registration had been completed.

After a year or so buddy starts to get a little worried about the whole thing. He's got this rifle sitting around, and hadn't heard anything from the CFC. Tried calling them a few times, but was never able to get through. Sent an email, which was never heard back on either. At this point he was debating the wisdom of following up on this thing too aggressively. He was getting pretty nervous so he destroyed the gun. He was going to toss the whole thing when it was chopped up but decided to keep the cut up receiver with the serial number on it, just in case.

Friend gets back into shooting, registered a few guns and what arrives in the mail one day but a registration certificate for the .22... 4 years and 11 months after originally submitted the registration form online. Now that's government efficiency. So now he's got a little piece of metal with a serial # sitting in a box in the safe with a registration form attached to it, and a lot of questions about why, if the CFC had this gun sitting in their records for all this time, they'd never tried to track him down, or you know, call or anything. This is proof to me that the registry... Sort of works? I guess? Eventually sometimes? Personally if I spent billions on something I'd expect better. Must be nice to work for the government.
-- themarauder (CGN)

The federal law is not applied equally province to province, and artificial holds are applied as penalties by the whims of various provincial CFOs for no good reason. DISCRETIONALY POWER gives CFOs the ability to play God.
e.g. AR15 registrations take 3 to 6 months in Quebec, as opposed to 2-3 days elsewhere in Canada.
(an irrelevant licencing example: A request to change to "Collectors Status" has been going on for 8 MONTHS now, as opposed to a week max in other provinces.)

It's only $60 and a bit of paperwork......wrong!

2010-10-28T11:10:00.000-07:00

STATEMENT: It's only $60 and a bit of paperwork. This is not a hardship on firearms owners.

ANSWER:

Quebec 1 Year & 4 Months on processing Handgun Request..., and counting....

- In February of 2008 a Handgun was ordered from Marstar.
- In May of 2008 the delay was "the Club Renewal not received"
- DELAY ( No Contact - Mail Box Full, messages left)
- In June 2008 Canadian Firearms Center (Quebec) says the Quebec Firearms Officer is in Ottawa!?
- In January 2009 the delay was an old contact that said "NO"
- In January 2009 everything was OK
- DELAY ( No Contact - Mail Box Full, left messages)
- In June 2009 Canadian Firearms Center (Quebec) hangs up phone when asking for Firearms Officer.
- In June 2009 Canadian Firearms Center agrees to contact Quebec Firearms Officer.

This is an example of the cost of the Gun Registry...

Why is it that these workers are ignorant and know nothing?!?!
Why is it that the person that has your file is the only one you can talk to?!?!
Why is their mailbox full and they never call back?
- NO ANSWERS -
Consider the case of Constable Mark Smith of the St. John, New Brunswick Police Department. In 1991, Constable Smith bought a Browning Hi Power from a gun store. During 1992 he got several 'permits to transport' for competitions outside New Brunswick. In 1993 he traded the gun in to a different store. The following year, the RCMP noticed there was no registration certificate number on one of the 1992 transport permits. They checked with FRAS, (the RCMP's restricted weapons database) which erroneously reported the gun had never been registered. Constable Smith was charged with possession of an unregistered restricted weapon, and suspended from his job.
During his trial, Constable Smith fortunately had a change of luck. A reference to his registration was discovered in a file ledger at the local police station, and he was acquitted. This case has a happy ending, but it serves to illustrate the impossible position a gun owner might find himself in. What would have happened had this ledger record not been uncovered? In all likelihood, Constable Smith would have been convicted, the same as any gun owner who is unable to prove his innocence.

Registry not accessible during armed standoff

2010-10-28T11:08:00.000-07:00

I have a prime example of why the registry is useless. My friend's house was broken into in Edmonton and there were firearms in the house. The intruder was holed up inside and would not come out. Tac team called in, snipers, grizzly apc's etc. I helped the SWAT teams with the layout as my friend was on holidays. We had to call my friend and list over the phone each of the firearms he had because the system WAS NOT ACCESSIBLE.

Visit by the Keystone cops of the CFC

2010-10-28T11:06:00.000-07:00

I have been apparently randomly selected to have the CFO visit me to 'clean up' some firearms listed as unknown, for either make or model. I was shocked at the lack of knowledge displayed by both the chief firearms officer and his sidekick. They claimed that the program used had 94,000 types and makes of firearms listed. I would be surprised if there were 940 types and models of firearms listed, as they has a great difficulty locating any of the 'unknowns' in my possession. Two examples of the lack of knowledge displayed:
1) My original Wilhelm Brenneke rifle is not a Brenneke (according to the CFO), as 'Brenneke' only refers to the cartridge. The model of the gun (ito my knowledge, Brenneke did not have any model numbers for their firearms), again according to the CFO, is Bohler Speziale. Any one that knows German firearms will recognize that as the type of steel used in manufacturing th barrel. As it stands, I have the only Brenneke Model Bohler Speziale firearm in the world!2) A semi auto Voere 22 was almost re-registered by the CFO as an air rifle, model 22lr!
The lunacy went on and on for three hours, and the above mentioned points were not the worst. They now want to return to take photos of the firearms that are not in their program, which leads me to ask a question, should I allow this? I'm thinking that it would likely be easier for them to get some decent reference books and add the pertinent information that way.
One thing that really got me going was the way they handled the firearms. They were grabbing and handling the firearms by the barrels and metal parts. I don't know about anyone else, but I have enough respect for anyone else's firearms, be they the most expensive, or the most humble of firearms, not to handle them in such a fashion.
All in all, I'm not impressed by these guys.
-- MetricMan (CGN)

One rifle, two papers and 2 rifles same serial number

2010-10-28T11:04:00.000-07:00

I have a situation where I have one long rifle and 2 registration #'s for it. When I first registered it they (cfc) put the wrong make on the registration, so I tired to have it change, well I got it change alright they (cfc) issued a new registration, so I have one rifle and 2 certificate's for it, I have tried but they (cfc) insist I must have 2 rifle's of differing make and the same serial number.

-- mosquito99

--------

I had a situation of 2 different rifles and same serial numbers.
It is frustrating trying to get them to grasp the concept that their system is wrong, and they are also.

-- jdman

Stolen gun reregistered and one not so stolen

2010-10-28T11:02:00.000-07:00

story of our beloved registry in action.

On Wednesday, the police came to my house and seized my Browning Citori which I had purchased used in February of this year. A couple months ago, the CFC left a message to contact them with an extension number. After trying to connect with them for these two whole months (a story in itself) I finally got through on Wednesday and was informed that my shotgun had been stolen in Toronto in 2001. The police were at my door 2 hours later and took it away saying that most likely the gun will be destroyed. As I had no idea of the history of the gun and was completely stunned by the sudden turn of events, there really wasn't much I could do.

I have since contacted the gentleman I purchased it from, a fellow CGNer who has been very helpful and as flabbergasted as I. He informed that he purchased the gun the gun in 2007 and provided me with details of that transaction including a CFC file number. This shows that the weapon has been in the system since at least 2007 and has been registered to at least 3 different people.

This leads to the obvious question of how a gun stolen in 2001 can have been in the system unnoticed for at least 2 years and why I wasn't informed that the gun was stolen at the time of transfer. Two billions dollars spent on the registry and this sort of thing happens. As things stand now, I'm definitely out a fine shotgun.

-- squeasel (CGN)

One of my hunting buddies was called by the RCMP, or SQ, I forget which, and was told they had his shotgun that was stolen. My buddy quickly replied "it was stolen????" The cop responds, "yes sir, I have it right here"
It took my buddy 15 minutes to make the cop believe that his shotgun was not stolen, and that he was looking at it in his safe as they were chatting on the phone.

System crashes muck up data and double registered guns

2010-10-28T10:56:00.000-07:00

There's been a few 'known' system crashes ... in which a 'undisclosed' amount of data was lost...
It happened to me once, when selling a non-restricted rifle that was registered in 1999... The girl on the phone said the registration # I had given wasn't in the system... When I insisted that I had the registration certificate in my hand, she put me on hold for a few minutes... Only to come back and said that she had found it... and wanted to confirm all details about the firearm [i.e. policy is to re-enter any missing registration certificate information]
I'm sure if the registration 'status' of one of your firearm was ever questioned in court... a good lawyer could most likely put enough doubt on the integrity/accuracy of the registry to get the 'charge' dropped.

I tried to have a gun that I bought at a store yesterday registered and the transfer was put on hold. Apparently there are 2 guns registered to the same Certificate number. How does this happen? Why aren't people accountable for wasting our tax dollars? If this was the private sector some one would be hearing about it. God only knows how long it will take to fix, mean while the store is paying interest on money for a gun they can't sell.

Bad data, duplicate serial numbers, wrong FRT information

2010-10-28T10:48:00.000-07:00

Unfortunately the intent of verification is to uniquely identify the firearm, but that it turns out is impossible. A firearm registration certificate may be issued only for a firearm that (a) bears a serial number sufficient to distinguish it from other firearms, or (b) that is described in the prescribed manner." Then Regulation 1.1 says, "For the purposes of paragraph 14(b) of the Act, the manner of describing a firearm is by referring to its make, class, type, action and calibre or gauge." Those two combine to destroy much of the usefulness of the firearms registration system. A firearms registration certificate is useless, because it fails to uniquely identify a firearm because it may describe a number of other firearms. Serial numbers are re-used by manufacturers, older firearms may not contain any information at all. Information taken from a firearm that is not stamped into the "frame or receiver" of that firearm is untrustworthy, and cannot be used by an applicant to identify the firearm. (The majority of firearms have most or all of their identifying information stamped into the barrel, the slide, or some other uncontrolled, interchangeable spare part that may or may not have been part of the firearm on the day it was manufactured. Such data is unusable.) Even data stamped into the "frame or receiver" is unreliable, as it may be a "house name," or the name of an importer, or the name of a distributor, rather than the name of the maker. It goes on and on.

The Firearms Reference Table (nicknamed FaRT by its users) is a program that comes on a CD from the government that is both slow, doesn't contain all the firearms, and is frequently complained about by those that try to use it. Several users noted that it may never be complete, given the nearly infinite number of combinations and permutations of firearms. Other users indicated that it is complex as a result of attempting to make it forensically correct. For example, a FaRT search for a "Make: Fabrique Nationale" handgun, "Model: 1935," will often fail because the firearm is registered as a "Make: Browning" handgun, "Model: High Power" -- an equally valid description of the same firearm. That particular handgun, according to FaRT, may be correctly registered if any one of six possible entries for "Make" was used, and any one of twelve "Model" entries, making a total of 72 different ways to register the same gun. The other way happens too: e.g. three quite different rifles have been marketed as the "Winchester Model 70". The FRT disks are also perpetually out of date, and always must be.

(NOTE: Few people use the disks any more. Most dealers use the online version because it is updated daily. The RCMP tanked the civilian verifier's network. Now it is pretty much limited to dealers and a select few non-dealer verifiers working for clubs, etc and "official" agents. At one time the Liberals planned on making a fortune selling their FRT to foreign countries as a valuable crime fighting "resource." We all know just how successful they were with those sales.)

The Canadian Verifier's Program was all but shut down in 2002, and there are no verifiers within hundreds of kilometers of people even in major cities within Canada. The current registration system uses the Calibre, Class, Type, Action, Shots (magazine capacity), and Barrel length to help identify the firearm. All of those identifying entries can be, and often are, changed by the addition, removal and/or substitution of uncontrolled interchangeable spare parts. They are largely useless as features used for unique identification. Make, Model and Manufacturer as defined to be primary "identifying" information. As an example, one of the new registration certificates "identifies" a firearm as being a "Make: Savage, Type: Rifle, Action: Bolt, Class: Non-restricted" firearm. Comparing that information with the data on the Firearms Reference Table CD-ROM, we learn that the registration certificate is describing any one of 195 different firearms manufactured by Savage. Similarly, comparing the new registration certificate for a "Make: Smith and Wesson, Type: Handgun, Action: Revolver, Class: Restricted" firearm with the CD-ROM data results in the "identification" of the firearm as being any one of 276 revolvers manufactured by Smith and Wesson. few people are aware there are often two or more perfectly valid serial numbers on the same firearm -- and yes, that does mean multiple serial numbers on the "frame or receiver." The NFA had to send an expert witness to Toronto to clear up a case regarding two Sten submachine guns and two registration certificates. The guns were not registered using the original British serial number, a situation that baffled the Crown's experts. They were registered using a valid serial number applied well after manufacture by the French government. The French apparently did not like the location of the British Serial number -- which was on an uncontrolled spare part. The French number was on the "frame or receiver," and was therefore preferable for "identification." The Serial numbers of German military firearms -- which are very common in Canada -- are useless for unique identification, by reason of frequent and deliberate duplication. Iver Johnson revolvers share that problem, and so do many other firearms. On some firearms, the Serial number is hidden or not easily recognized as a Serial number. At one point, the Registry had over a dozen Walther semi-automatic handguns registered in a manner that showed the Patent number as being the Serial number. Serial numbers are often found on the replaceable barrel (a part that wears out), yet the reciever is the official 'gun', not the barrel. Many firearms have no Serial number at all, because the law, at the time and place of manufacture, did not require the manufacturer to stamp Serial numbers on that type of firearm. Some military surplus firearms have no Serial numbers because a government ordered them made that way

If, on any day after the issuance of registration certificates, the owner moves to a new location, emigrates, or dies -- and no one tells the Registry -- all firearms certificates in the name of that person are still in the Registry, but they have become meaningless. The firearms are "gone guns". The NFA's best estimate is that somewhere over 30 per cent of all firearms recorded in the Registry are ghost guns or gone guns. Those records are meaningless and useless. In Jan 2001, the registry admitted that of the 1,250,000 registration records in their system, at least 650,000 are meaningless -- and have now been recognized as spurious.
In the registration transfer system, the transferor has no way of knowing whether or not his "informing the Registrar" will actually result in the firearm being deleted from the Registry's records of his own holdings. He may still be shown on the Registry's records as still being in possession of a "ghost gun" twenty years after transferring the firearm -- lawfully -- to another. [C-15B s. 105, FA s. 23(c)] The Registry makes that error often, because the Registry is, always has been, and apparently always will be, riddled with errors, omissions, and duplications. As proof of that statement, please note that firearms dealers usually have 20 to 50 per cent more firearms in stock in the Registry records than they do in the store. It is utterly unacceptable to impose the Registry's defective registration record system on any owner, possessor, dealer or borrower -- and then criminalize him on that basis.

The law C-68 was known when it was authored to be so badly written and riddled with things that wouldn't work, that it was peppered with 'prescribed' and 'regulation', so that any part of it may be overridden by orders in council to fix it when the rules turn out to be unworkable, as they so often have been. Criminal law is our most serious law, and yet using regulations as part of law has side effects too. e.g. R v. Rusk (Saskatchewan Provincial Court in Prince Albert, Jun 2 2000) dealt with Regulation 4, in the "Storage of Non-Restricted Firearms Regulations." However, the Regulation they were looking at became null and void on 01 Dec 1998. It was part of a set of Regulations that had been superseded by a new set of Regulations that were made in Mar 1998, but did not come into force until 01 Dec 1998. The offence in question took place on 04 Aug 1999, so the new Regulation -- 5, not 4, and with differing wording -- should have been the subject of the trial. Apparently no one -- Crown, defence or judge -- was aware of the fact that they were looking at an invalid Regulation. How can a citizen know what law is in effect, when lawyers with a duty and the time to find out the law, don't notice it either.
Even the head of the registry has no idea what's in his system, and how to get information out of it. The Registry sent a sworn document to the Crown prosecutor saying that a careful search of their data base for "Chinese machine gun, calibre 9mm, Serial Number 001120" showed that the gun had never been registered. Another certified document was sent to the defence lawyer in that case. It was a certified true copy of the Registry's copy of the registration certificate for that particular submachine gun. Both documents were signed by the same man -- the head of the Registry -- on the same day. A danger of error and resulting injustice arises from the combined incompetence of those who initiate and those who process search requests. Police don't trust the paper registration certificate when its handed to them, and check the 'official' source, the database, which even the head of the registry can't use with any certainty.

Wrong name and guns still in their name but owned by someone else

2010-10-28T10:44:00.000-07:00

o, I had a couple of guns to register and I decided to use the online registration and telephone verification process. I end up waiting about 15 minutes for a verifier. The verifier turns out to be some French lady who speaks passable English. I tell her what I have: a Gevarm .22 semi automatic and a Winchester Model 94 in .32 SPL I'd like registered. She asks me for the model number for the Gevarm and I tell her it is a E-1, its not stamped on the barrel but I discovered this through other sources. The nice French lady than tells me this isn't possible and I have to have the guns on hand if I want them verified I insist that I have the rifles right in front of me. She then asks me if they are loaded.. WTF, of course not. I then read her precisely what is stamped on the barrel carbine automatiqe Gevarm et.. So, she gives me the reference table number and her info which I madly type into the online registration form as I can hardly understand her and want to make sure it will accept the info. She ends up transferring me to an English speaking gentleman who helps me overcome the errors I had made on recording her info with the language barrier. Fine, hang up, continue with the form. Winchester is registered fine. but my Gevarm is now a single shot Huntington & Richardson .22. At least the serial number will be correct.

Cool how your Gevarm didn't compute, but a Huntington and Richardson did.......considering there is no such thing.
Harrington.

------

I'll bet if all the mistakes and mis-registered firearms were ever known, the Registry would be laughed out of existence in a week. If you want a real amusing day, try registering a customized military Mauser that's been re-barreled to a different caliber!

When I tried it, they said "But they never made that rifle in that caliber ..."

Apparently the ability to re-barrel and change a firearm's caliber is lost on the CFC.

-------

I just received an official printout of my registered guns as of Sept 19 2009
There are 7 guns still registered to me, including a handgun, that I have sold and transferred and have the "seller" letter to prove it.
Nice system.
That handgun was sold around Christmas time and the guy has been shooting it weekly at Phoenix Range.....and apparently it still belongs to me.
-- huntinstuff, Location: Alberta, on September 23, 2009

ERRORS KEEP PILING UP IN THE GUN REGISTRY

2010-10-27T18:43:00.000-07:00

ERRORS KEEP PILING UP IN THE GUN REGISTRY

By Garry Breitkreuz, MP – Updated: April 9, 2002

“The old gun registry was riddled with errors and so is the new one.”

NOTE #1: All errors in firearms licences and registration certificates should be reported to the Minister of Justice and the Auditor General of Canada. All errors that either violate your privacy rights or have the potential to do so should be reported to the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. Contact information is provided at the end of this document.

NOTE #2: The original list of errors was released on February 28, 2002:

http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/breitkreuzgpress/GunControl57.htm

1. RCMP ADMIT THERE ARE 49,000 UNLICENCED OWNERS OF REGISTERED WEAPONS IN BC: Sources inside the RCMP advise that during "Violence and Relationships" courses delivered recently in British Columbia, the RCMP instructor told police officers that there are 49,000 individuals from BC in the Restricted Weapons Registration System (RWRS) that do not hold a valid Firearms Acquisition Certificate (FAC) and that they had also failed to apply for Possession and Acquisition Licences (PAL) as required by the Criminal Code of Canada. Despite being in unlawful possession of restricted and/or prohibited firearms, the RCMP officers were also told it was at the discretion of each officer whether or not to proceed with charges against these individuals. If they encounter one of these 49,000 owners of these registered, restricted and/or prohibited weapons, they have been instructed that the preferred course of action is: (1) Seize the firearm(s), (2) Advise the person to obtain a PAL at which time their firearm would be returned to them.

2. JUSTICE DEPT. DOCUMENTS SHOW ERROR RATES OF 71% TO 91% IN GUN REGISTRY: On March 19, 2002, the Department of Justice sent documents to Garry Breitkreuz, MP, in response to an Access to Information Act request (DoJ File: A-2000-0209. In “Background material to assist the Canadian Firearms Program Advisory Committee to advise Minister McLellan for the purpose of Submissions to Treasury Board or Social Union Committee” dated April 28, 2000 (page 3) titled, STATISTICS – LICENCES: 71% ERROR RATE – REGISTRATIONS 91% ERROR RATE.

Click here to see a copy of this document:

http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/ErrorRatesLicencingRegistration.pdf

3. RCMP ADMIT THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE BUT ARE NOT IN CONTROL OF GUN REGISTRATION PROCESSING: On March 15, 2002, in response to an Access to Information Act request, the RCMP advised they don’t have information on error rates in the gun registry and provided this explanation: “While final approval of an application rests with the Canadian Firearms Registry (CFR), much of the work associated with clarifying information is done prior to the data input, a task which falls outside of the RCMP and is under the control of the Canadian Firearms Centre.” This is a surprising development considering the RCMP has had 68-years of experience running the gun registry. How can the RCMP be responsible for issuing registration certificates that they don’t process?

Click here to see a copy of the RCMP letter:

http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/RCMPATIResponse2002-03-15.pdf

4. ALBERTA MP’s FIREARMS LICENCE SAYS HE’S A MORON FROM OKATOKS, ONTARIO: On April 4, 2002, Winnipeg Sun columnist Tom Brodbeck wrote: Canadian Alliance MP Grant Hill is no moron -- unless you listen to the pointy-headed bureaucrats at Ottawa's beleaguered firearm registry office. Hill, an Alberta MP, is a firearm owner. And he got the shock of his life recently when the gun registration people issued him a firearm licence. Hill's full name is Norman Grant Hill. But his newly issued gun licence read "Moron Grant Hill."

But Hill's troubles didn't end there. Not only was he a moron in the eyes of firearms officials, he also found out that, much to his surprise, he no longer lives in Alberta. Apparently he moved to Ontario and didn't even know it. Hill lives in Okotoks, Alta. But the bozos in Ottawa issued him a licence with an address in Okotoks, Ont. So the next time some moron holds up a bank, accidentally drops his firearm in the commission of the crime and leaves it behind, they can go looking for him in Okotoks, Ont.

5. AFTER 3 TRIES THE FIREARMS CENTRE STILL CAN’T GET HIS NAME RIGHT: On April 4, 2002, The Winnipeg Sun (Page 5) reported: Canada's new gun registration centre can't seem to get it right. Wolfram Fuhr, a 59-year-old retired electrician from Birds Hill, owns a .22-calibre rifle that he has tried to properly register three times -- each time unsuccessfully. "I've done everything I can to rectify the problem, but they don't seem interested or to care," said Fuhr. The problem for Fuhr is a spelling mistake in his name on the gun licence. "This registration system was a makeshift program for people who can't pass kindergarten," said Fuhr. "Can't these people read?" Fuhr said he spelled his name correctly on the registration form, which was compared for accuracy with his driver's licence, but was sent a gun licence with the last name "Fuhtr." When told of Fuhr's situation Canadian Firearms Centre spokesman David Austin said he would forward Fuhr's problem on to a customer service representative personally. "It should be right on his licence and right in our computer," said Austin. "We have customer service people here who can sort this out for him just like they did for the last guy." The last guy Austin is referring to is Paul Krawchuck. Last week, The Sun reported Krawchuk was having problems removing guns registered to his name that he didn't own. Like Fuhr, Krawchuk called the Canadian Firearms Centre two times before contacting The Sun. Both problems were looked into, after Austin was informed. Minutes after The Sun notified Austin yesterday of Fuhr's problem, Fuhr received a phone call from the centre offering to correct the problem at his convenience. "I've never seen anyone bend over backwards so fast. I can't believe it," said Fuhr. "For 1 1/2 years I've been arguing with them. It's crazy."

6. RCMP REGISTER FIVE GUNS TO A MAN WHO DOESN’T OWN THEM: On March 30, 2002, the Winnipeg Sun (Page 5) reported: The people in charge of registering Canada's firearms are under fire once again this month -- this time for registering guns that don't exist. "What kind of dummies are looking after gun registration?" asked Garden Grove resident Paul Krawchuk. "First they register a heating gun, then they register guns that I don't even own." Krawchuk received a letter from the federal government this week confirming the registration of four rifles and a .22-calibre handgun. The 34-year-old city recycling employee owns four black powder hunting rifles, but none is registered and they aren't the same kind as the ones that Ottawa has registered for him. "Why can't they get it right?" asked Krawchuk. "How many other guys out there are having messes like this?" Last week, Oak Lake resident Bill Buckley registered his soldering iron as a firearm to highlight glitches in the registration system.

7. RCMP REGISTER A BLACK & DECKER SOLDERING GUN: On March 1, 2002, Brian Buckley of Manitoba was issued with a Registration Certificate for his Black & Decker/Weller, 110 Volt AC soldering gun. The gurus in the gun registry identified it as a “Non-Restricted” firearm and gave it a “Firearm Identification Number”. This proves beyond any doubt that the government has completely abandoned any hope of keeping the Justice Minister’s promise to the Canadian Police Association that they would “verify” the accuracy of the information in the gun registration system.

Click here to see a copy of the Registration Certificate: http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/SolderingGunRegistrationCertificate.pdf

8. BC MAN DISCOVERS RCMP REGISTERED SOMEONE ELSE’S GUNS TO HIM: On February 29, 2002, he wrote to the gurus in the gun registry, “Please be advised that the gun shown on the attached forms are NOT the ones I have or ever have had in my possession, and certainly not those I attempted to register some time ago. My original application form listed the following two rifles: 1. Lee-Enfield .303 calibre, Serial No. Dxxxxxx and 2. Cooey Model 39, Single Shot, .22 calibre, Serial No. unknown. Would you please correct your records and forward the proper registration certificates.”

9. GUN REGISTRY SYSTEM CAN’T IDENTIFY FIREARMS: On March 8, 2002, in a letter to the editor of the Alliston Herald, Peter E. Sticklee of Thornton, Ontario, wrote describing his call to the Canadian Firearms Centre to find out if he had to register one of his firearms: “On the first call, I waited for 20 minutes and then gave up. Later in the morning, I called again. After another 20 minutes, I hang up. On my third call of the day and after a 25-minute wait a person who identified herself as firearms officer took my call. When I described my firearm as a CO2 gas powered .380 shotgun, she didn’t have a clue what I was talking about. When I told her that it was a Model 1100 that was manufactured by Crosman (the famous pellet gun maker), she insisted that I was talking about a Remington Model 1100, Wingmaster 12-gauge shotgun. While the criminal misuse of firearms runs rampant in Canada’s major cities, law abiding gun owners either can’t get a call through to Ottawa, or at least find someone who knows what they are talking about, when it comes to something as simple as an air gun.”

10. RCMP REGISTER PROHIBITED AK47 AS A RESTRICTED FIREARM: On March 15, 2002, an Ontario firearms owner wrote: What happened to me was exactly the same than Mr. Charles Schafer i.e. I received a registration for my prohibited AK47 incorrectly (according to the CFC) classified as restricted. I am sure that this happened to hundreds of AK owners in Canada.

11. FIREARMS CENTRE HAS NO RECORD OF OVER HALF OF THE HANDGUNS IN NB MANS POSSESSION: On March 20, 2002, in the Moncton Times and Transcript, Columnist Everett Mosher wrote: Federal law requires all handgun owners to re-register their handgun or handguns by Dec. 31 of this year. If they do not, they will be considered a criminal and could face up to five years in prison. This, despite the fact that handgun owners have previously registered their firearms at the time of purchase, and have the registration certificate to prove it. So why is the federal government requiring that all handguns be re-registered? The truth is that the federal system of handgun registration that has been in place since 1934 is a mess, to the point that the government has decided to start all over again, from square one. Hence the requirement that current handgun owners are required to re-register their handguns. One owner of over 20 handguns, all legally registered at the time of purchase, found that the Canadian Firearm Centre had no record at all of over half of the handguns in his possession. Of those that the CFC had records of, and were listed in his name, several of these had never been in his possession, while others on the list had been sold some years previous. This is not an isolated case.

12. BC HANDGUN OWNER RECEIVED REGISTRATION CERTIFICATES WITHOUT EVEN APPLYING: On March 20, 2002, a respected firearm owner from British Columbia wrote: One fellow in our local club received new registrations for his pistols without even applying for them. I wonder how prevalent that is and the point being is that since the purpose of re-registration is to clean up the mess in the old registration, if they go sending out new forms based on the old forms they are perpetuating the old problems.

13. OTTAWA GUN OWNER EXPOSES CFC MISTAKES ON ALL SEVEN OF HIS REGISTRATION CERTIFICATES: On March 18, 2002, an Ottawa gun owner wrote: Between my wife and I, the firearms registry has data on seven firearms, including one since 1978. Every single registration certificate has at least one major error. Wrong type, wrong model, wrong maker, strange cartridge names, variable dimensions, spelling mistakes and so on. How the barrel of one gun "grew" from one certificate to another is a miracle indeed. All certificates have entries that cannot be found on the firearm itself. How will a false or fictitious record serve any purpose?

14. GUN WITH NO SERIAL NUMBER CAN’T BE IDENTIFIED BY $700 MILLION GUN REGISTRY: On April 8, 2002 a Calgary gun owner wrote: “You may be interested to know that I recently registered an unserialized Hiawatha .22 rimfire bolt rifle passed down by my grandfather. It was his farm pest gun, and was purchased some time in the 1950s or 60s. The CFC issued a certificate with the serial number designated as "unknown", but at the same time failed to issue an FIN sticker or any other identifying designation of any sort. Aside from its sentimental value, the gun is rather unremarkable "utility grade" piece, and I understand that up to several thousand of them were produced over the years, including numerous variants. My registration certificate can apply to any one of these firearms. As you have said, what a mess.”

Gun registered to wrong person

2010-10-27T17:14:00.000-07:00

From Shootemup at CGN

Not epic. but they registered a gun to me that I never owned and it took considerable effort on my part to have it removed.

(Colin's note: it would have been epic if the gun had been used in a crime)

My story and the reason for this blog

2010-10-27T11:48:00.000-07:00

The purpose of this blog is to track failures of the gun registry. Stories submitted must have happen to you personally or directly from someone you know. No “I heard from my uncles friends buddies” stories. We want to stay as factual as we can be within the restraints that we are working under.
I will submit my story first;
Waited till the last minute to register my .22cal rifle and .303 Enfield, both of which I had owned since I was 18 with no issue. Sent the papers by registered mail and got the receipt back. 2 years later I get a letter from the Canadian Firearms Centre (CFC) stating: “Due to missing information my file can not be completed and that if I don’t respond my file will be closed and I would be a criminal”. (not exact wording but close enough)
Phoned up the CFC to ask what information was missing, they replied……..
“We need your mailing address”
So I asked: “If you didn’t have that, how could you have sent me a letter?” Very long pause……..”Thank you we will complete your file now”

This is a true story on how I avoided being a criminal (so far)

Don’t you feel safer?