MP Pierrette Venne decries the government's impromptu approach to the administration of costs associated with the Firearms Act (Le Devoir, February 20, 2001, p. A7). The bill has increased from an initial estimate of $85 million to $489 million, and the Act has not yet come into full force.

However, the solution proposed by Ms. Venne, namely the privatization of the firearms registration process, is alarming. In his February 16 letter to the MP for Yorktown-Melville, the Privacy Commissioner expressed his grave concern regarding such a possibility. The creation of enormous databases necessitated by the legislation already worries citizens troubled by the type of personal information they were obliged to disclose in order to obtain a firearm licence. In response to the concerns of observers, Commissioner George Radwanski is currently reviewing the application form.

Gun owners, who were also required to complete this prying questionnaire, clearly understand the scope of the danger. They were asked to answer some indecent questions such as, "During the past five years, [...] have you been diagnosed or treated by a medical practitioner for: depression; [...]?" (question 19d); and "During the past two years, have you experienced a divorce, a separation, a breakdown of a significant relationship, job loss or bankruptcy?" (question 19f).

Details must be provided for each positive response. The police have the discretionary authority to investigate; this can include contacting neighbours or requesting additional information. I myself had to provide the names and addresses of individuals with whom I had "lived as a couple for three months or more" during the past two years. It would appear that the State is still in the bedrooms of the nation.

An enormous database containing information on approximately three million Canadians will thus be constructed. This, in and of itself, is shocking; however, it is even more distressing in light of the federal government's nonchalant attitude toward the protection of personal information. The scandal involving the Human Resources Development Canada database is a perfect example.

Nevertheless, the privacy issue is not the only aspect of the legislation giving citizens cause for concern about civil liberties. Gun collectors already know that Bill C-68 opens the door for disturbing police practices such as "inspections" without warrants (section 102 of the Firearms Act). The law also provides for the confiscation of several hundred thousand duly registered and legally owned weapons following the death of their owners, without compensation to the beneficiaries of the deceased.

The government is trying to justify this operation by citing the alleged benefits of the legislation in terms of crime, violence, and suicide prevention. In actual fact, the 1991 and 1995 controls, adopted at the request of the lobby formed following the massacre at the Polytechnique, are nothing more than legislative hypertrophy. Handguns have been registered in Canada since 1934. A licence has been needed to acquire a firearm since the adoption of the 1977 Firearms Control Act; therefore, the opportunity for police to verify a licence applicant's background has existed for some time. Automatic weapons have been prohibited since the adoption of the 1977 legislation. The current process for registering firearm owners therefore targets peaceful citizens who owned hunting weapons since before 1977, and have not necessarily acquired any since that time.

Rare accidents

As early as 1993, in his report to the House of Commons, the Auditor General of Canada criticized the Department of Justice for having imposed new controls without first establishing the deterrent effect of the previous act on crime. Recent studies have confirmed the futility of the 1991 legislation and this type of measure in preventing suicide. One of the studies was conducted by Jean Caron, professor at the University of Quebec in Abitibi-Témiscamingue and researcher at Montreal's Douglas Hospital. His research revealed that, while restricting access to guns did lead to a shift toward hanging as the preferred method of suicide over hanging in this region, particularly among young people; unfortunately, it did not lead to a reduction in numbers.

Accidents are rare. Between 1966 and 1991, that is, during the time there was no legislation governing the storage of firearms, the rate of accidental deaths due to firearms dropped by 80% in Canada. Voluntary awareness campaigns by hunting and sports shooting associations can be credited.

The adoption of new legislation in 1991 and 1995 elicited very little debate in Quebec. Yet the government believes that there are more than 500,000 Quebeckers who represent a potential threat to others and even to themselves simply because they own guns. Their names are contained in a database and they must notify the police when they move. Those who planned to keep their father's old, rusted hunting rifle without telling anyone should reconsider. The fact that it is impossible to purchase ammunition is not the only consequence of owning a hunting weapon without a licence. Although it is not mentioned in the government's television publicity, offenders face the possibility of a five-year sentence. On January 1, several hundred thousand peaceful Canadians became instant criminals.

The indignation caused by the most recent controls has had very little debate in the public forum especially in Quebec. Instead, it has been discussed in private. We must not hesitate to denounce C-68 out loud: Opposing it does not mean tolerating violence committed against women (or against men for that matter). It does not mean being indifferent to the despair of those who commit suicide, or shrugging one's shoulders when an accident occurs.

Mortality - Summary List of Causes, 1997
from Statistics Canada
(.pdf file)