If Canada Doesn’t Need a National Gun Registry, Why Do We?

When Senator Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation last week to reinstate the assault weapons ban, the veteran California Democrat also proposed a national gun registry. The registry would apply to all legally owned weapons grandfathered prior to the assault weapons ban taking effect.

Canadians are all too familiar with gun registries. In 1995, the Liberal government of Jean Chrétien passed the Firearms Act which established the Canadian Firearms Registry. It was a white elephant plagued by cost overruns in the hundreds of millions of dollars and was the target of frequent criticism by Sheila Fraser, Canada’s former Auditor General. Noted conservative Canadian journalist Peter Worthington wrote, “Gun registry is little but an expensive, unnecessary, largely useless waste of time. Bureaucratic boondoggle aptly describes the program.”

The Conservative Party long vowed to scrap the gun registry when it came to power. Although Stephen Harper’s Tories ousted the Liberals from power in 2006, they did not have a majority in parliament until after the 2011 election. Last year, the Tories finally abolished the Canadian Firearms Registry. Shortly before the House of Commons held its final vote on the matter, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews told reporters, “It does nothing to help put an end to gun crimes, nor has it saved one Canadian life. This is simply an attempt to make people feel safe, rather than doing something substantive in criminal law.”

The Canadian Firearms Registry has become such an albatross that even Liberal politicians now want no part of it. Last December, Liberal leadership hopeful Justin Trudeau (the eldest son of the late Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau) said, “The long gun registry, as it was, was a failure and I’m not going to resuscitate that.” Trudeau’s main leadership rival, Marc Garneau (who is best known as Canada’s first man in space), made similar comments. It’s gone now,” he said. “The Conservatives have killed it. Let’s move on to other things. It is not my intention to spend more money to bring it back.”

So if Canada doesn’t need a national gun registry, why do we?

Now it is true that even without the firearms registry, Canada still has far stricter gun laws than the United States. That said, there are only two things accomplished by compelling law abiding gun owners to register their weapons with the federal government. The first is that it gives the federal government more power and control over our day-to-day lives. The second is that it gives the federal government yet another opportunity to create a bloated bureaucracy and, as a consequence, expand the deficit.


If the Clinton-era ban on assault weapons couldn’t prevent the Columbine massacre, what makes anyone think that a national gun registry is going to prevent another Newtown? Come to think of it, there is a third thing that is accomplished by compelling law abiding gun owners to register their weapons with the federal government. By putting pressure to bear on law-abiding gun owners, it gives the appearance that the federal government is doing something about a social problem and thus justifies its existence. That doing something often does more harm than good almost never enters into the equation.

In an era where big government is practiced by both Democrats and Republicans, the hardest thing in the world is to do nothing. This is especially true when you don’t get good press for it or for that matter any press at all. After all, when is the last time you heard a contemporary politician say, “The government which governs least governs best”? You certainly won’t hear it from a politician who is about to get money for his or her congressional district or state. You certainly won’t hear it from a politician who is about to break ground on the construction of the headquarters of the new national gun registry.

In which case, it is up to private citizens to help our elected officials cast their eyes north of the border. If Canada can survive without a national firearms registry, then so can we.

Print Friendly

Pages: 1 2

1 comment to If Canada Doesn’t Need a National Gun Registry, Why Do We?

  • Bill Wavering

    There are three distinct things that would be accomplished by a National Gun registry:

    First: Everybody would eventually know where all the guns are. Remember the situation created by the Journal News when it published the names and addresses of all the gun owners in Westchester and Rockland counties in New York? The registry would be subject to the FOIA. Now imagine an interactive map of all the gun owners in the entire country. Do you believe, for one minute, the New York Times wouldn’t jump at the chance to create such an interactive map?

    Second: Once you have such a registry; any time you update the gun restriction laws to include another firearm; you’ll know exactly where to go and collect said newly outlawed firearm. Politicians can manufacture criminals as required in order to distract from other pressing issues.

    Third: While such a registry would not affect criminals one bit as they, by definition, do not obey the law: It could make inadvertent criminals out of law-abiding citizens. I used to have a Concealed Carry Permit. Recently my doctor prescribed Wellbutrin in order to assist me with my challenge of quitting smoking after 45 years. We went with this specific drug because I was concerned about the adverse side effects reported by Chantrix.

    I went to renew my CCW last month and my re-application was turned down by state law enforcement. They also informed me that my CCW was immediately rescinded. Why? Wellbutrin is defined by the FDA as an anti-depressant: An automatic disqualifier for a CCW.

    So what happens when some poor sap decides to quit smoking, gets a prescription from his doctor, and a week later the feds kick in his door, handcuff him and confiscate all his duly registered firearms because they just ‘think’ he may be depressed.

Leave a Reply

The politically motivated, wrongful prosecution of Rick Renzi

New AG Sessions and Congress Must Investigate DOJ Corruption in the Case of Rep. Rick Renzi
Rick Renzi Puts Together Top Legal Team to Appeal Hidden Evidence of FBI Agent's Corruption
Judge Unbelievably Refuses to Grant a Retrial for Former Rep. Renzi Despite Finding Rampant Prosecutorial Wrongdoing
Bombshell: New Evidence Reveals Prosecutor Corruption in Trial Against Former Congressman Rick Renzi
Time For a Congressional Investigation: Shattering New Developments of Corruption in Rep. Renzi Trial
Judge Unravels Illegal Activity by Prosecution That Ensured a Conviction of Renzi — But Will he do Anything About it?
Former Congressman Renzi Deserves a New Trial
SCOTUS Turns Down Former Rep. Rick Renzi’s Appeal of Legal Assault

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner