Flawed registration and bad data

Submitted by the "Duke"
A few years back, I had an opportunity to help a friend out by lending him a non restricted rifle. This lending was 100% legitimate. He had a valid PAL, I provided him with a copy of the registration certificate, I wrote a note explaining that I was lending it to him, and I wrote my 24hr contact and PAL information on the back.

One day, he was pulled over while driving and, somehow, the police officer got into looking into his trunk (SUV). Even though my friend was in the vehicle, the rifle was unloaded, locked, in a locked case and completely out of sight.

Anyhow, not thinking he had anything to hide (officer asked the "do you have any alcohol in the vehicle" line), he allowed the officer to check in the back of his SUV.

Rifle was found, inspected, and confiscated as "stolen property" on the spot, despite the paperwork and contact info. No call, no explanation, just a confiscated rifle. Also curious is that they let my friend drive off, even though he had been in possession of an apparently stolen firearm.

Anyhow, I head to the local RCMP office come Monday. It turned out that it wasn't the lending equation that sparked the stolen firearm confiscation, but the registry had a name other than my own in its database. Funny thing was the registration certificate, that I also had a copy of, was the whole page that included my full name. As was the certificate that my friend had provided during the incident.

The officer did politely return the firearm to me, explaining that he was following the direction of his superiors and that I would be thankful if the situation were different.

Inconvenience aside, the firearm was returned in good order. Frustrating that the almighty database can make your own property "stolen" and no longer yours due to a data entry error.

__________________

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

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?
__________________

Stolen guns reregistered again and again

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!!!!!!

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

Gun Registry made of Swiss cheese?

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.

Fabrique Nationale does not make guns, claims CFC!

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?

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

Is that a Pistol or a rifle in your pocket?

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

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

Paper Crimmanls

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

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

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 !?!?!?!

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

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.

Visit by the Keystone cops of the CFC

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

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

System crashes muck up data and double registered guns

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

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.