Why on earth should we kill the gun registry now?

WE WONDER WHAT was in the minds of the eight Liberal and 12 New Democrat MPs who joined with the Conservatives in supporting a private member's bill designed to kill Canada's controversial long gun registry.

The support by the eight Liberal MPs is particularly perplexing, and seems to demonstrate anew a lack of strong leadership by leader Michael Ignatieff.

After all, the registry was the product of a Liberal government that acted in response to perceived public support for more gun control measures, and the basis for the most credible opposition to the registry — its enormous initial cost — is now water under the bridge.

Today, the only benefit to be derived from the registry's demise would be fulfillment of the Conservatives' pledge to the potent gun lobby.

Interestingly, the "free" Commons vote (truly free only for the opposition MPs) came while the government had, but had not released, quarterly figures from the RCMP showing not just increased police use of the registry, but increased civilian use, with 7.46 million firearms registered by the end of September, up 100,000 from the 7.36 million at the end of last year. Of that total, 6.7 million were non-restricted long guns, such as rifles and shotguns, up from 6.6 million at the end of last year.

The government also withheld until after the vote the Commissioner of Firearms 2008 report. Required by law, the report comes at a time when polls indicate that public support for the registry remained strong only in Quebec.

A largely positive review of the guncontrol program, the 2008 report confirmed a trend toward increased police use of the gun registry database. But the 2009 numbers are even more pronounced and, the RCMP suggests, indicate a growing confidence in the database.

In 2003, police officers accessed the online firearms registry an average of 1,811 times a day. By this September 30, the average-daily-use figure had soared to 10,818.

The RCMP's quarterly numbers indicated that police check the database for a full range of information about gun owners. Of the more than 10,000 daily queries, the average number directly related to the guns registered (the serial number or registration certificate) was only 296 or 2.7 per cent.

In the circumstances, we're left wondering what valid reason Prime Minister Stephen Harper's law-andorder Conservatives have to kill off the registry, beyond pandering to their rural constituencies.

Granted, critics of the registry have raised a lot of good points. There's not a shadow of doubt that far too much bureaucracy was involved in its creation or that the government of the day did an incredibly poor job of selling its potential benefits to the millions of law-abiding owners of rifles and shotguns.

Nor is there any doubt that the fees set for registering the firearms were far too high or that there was no need to require renewals of firearms acquisition permits. The only appropriate fee would be for information requiring a change in the registry beyond the owner's address, such as a new purchase or sale.

Clearly, one benefit of any registry lies in tits ability to deal with losses or thefts. And there's surely little doubt that criminals like to steal firearms.

As well, a comprehensive firearms registry can be a useful tool for police who all too often find themselves dealing with potentially violent domestic disputes.

Undoubtedly, police ought to have the right to seize firearms possessed by a party to a domestic dispute. And with a comprehensive, up-to-date gun registry it would take only a few seconds for the investigating officer to determine whether a firearm was registered.

Undoubtedly, critics of the registry had good reason to portray it as having been "a billion-dollar-boondoggle," since it did cost more than $1 billion to set it up, rather than the relative pittance required by simply having userfriendly registration forms online or in the local Canadian Tire store.

However, the RCMP says the registries for both handguns and long guns cost just $8.4 million to operate last year — about 25 cents per Canadian.

We never expected to see criminals registering their firearms, and we doubt that such an expectation existed in the minds of the registry's designers. However, it's also true that the registry's existence makes it possible for criminals found in possession of firearms to face additional sanctions, particularly if the weapon is either unregistered or the registry shows it to have been stolen.

The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police still strongly supports the registry, arguing that Canada's 2 million gun owners need to be accountable for their 7 million firearms.

Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair credits registration with helping his force recently uncover a cache of 58 unregistered firearms, and calls the cost of the long-gun registry "money well spent," making life a bit safer for his officers.

Simply put, why should we have to register our births, deaths and motor vehicles, but not firearms?