Showing posts with label stolen gun. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stolen gun. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

159 failures is a success in police eyes


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

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

Mountie-killer's guns not registered, inquiry hears

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

Sunday, January 16, 2011

Recovered stolen guns

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?

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

Friday, October 29, 2010

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

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

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.

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Stolen gun reregistered and one not so stolen

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.