H. Taylor Buckner, Ph.D. | P.O. Box 320, South Hero, Vermont 05486-0320 | (802) 372-5236 |
Home Page | E-Mail: taylor@buckner.cc |
E-Mail: taylor@buckner.cc
H. Taylor Buckner, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Sociology
Concordia University, Montreal
I appear before you today as a sociologist who has followed
the gun control debate for the thirty years since I was a police
officer, as an expert in survey research which I have practiced
and taught for 35 years, as a member of the Quebec Shooting
Federation, an instructor for the Canadian Firearms Safety Course
given by the Quebec Wildlife Federation, and, apparently, as one
of the 5,000 reported members of the Coalition for Gun Control.
I will confine my comments to a few points that I have
researched.
Under-Estimation
of Number of Firearms In Canada
On December 3, 1990, I wrote the Director of the Firearms
Control Task Force, proposing a study based on 10,000 interviews,
to determine the distribution of firearms ownership in Canada.
Many months later, with no response from the Firearms Control
Task Force, and only after a freedom of information request by
Southam News, I discovered that the study had been carried out in
February 1991, with a sample of 10,000, using a slightly cheaper,
but defective, methodology. This study (Reid)
became the foundation of the Government's estimate of the number
of firearms in the country.
According to estimates I calculated from the 1995 Gun Control
Survey, organized by Professor Gary Mauser, with my assistance,
the Reid study under-estimated the
number of firearms in Canada by at least 24%. This is a result of
women not reporting firearms ownership (which has been found in
other surveys), and not taking into account those who refused to
answer the question. There are also people who lie, which makes
the total an unknown percentage higher. Similar problems have
been reported in U.S. surveys (Erskine;
Kennett; Kleck). Thus, the cost estimates for
Bill C-68 based on the number of firearms to be registered are
many, many millions of dollars too low.
Universal firearms registration is justly controversial.
Personally, I routinely send a list of all my firearms to the
Surete du Quebec so that they will have it on file in case my
guns are stolen or destroyed, along with my records, in a fire.
But is universal registration good public policy?
Even those who support universal registration can only say
they hope it will reduce firearms accidents, suicides and
homicides by forcing gun owners to be more careful, and by
providing the police with a list for Prohibition Orders, or for
seizure in case of domestic conflict. There is certainly no
research that suggests that either of these hopes is realistic,
but for the sake of argument let's say they are. For either to
work, the weapons likely to be misused would have to be
registered, and in the case of prohibition orders, the
registration would have to be current, complete, and correct.
In the 1995 Gun Control survey, a
national study carried out by Canadian Facts in which 1,505
Canadian adults were interviewed, we asked gun owners, "If
the government's proposal to register all firearms becomes law,
do you plan on registering all, some, or none of your
firearms?" Overall, only 71.1% (± 6%) of gun owners said
they would register all their guns. In other words, roughly two
million firearms belonging to over a quarter of firearms owners
will remain unregistered. Of course, over time with great
expenditure of funds and criminal prosecutions, more than 71.1%
registration could probably be achieved.
As Table 1 shows, among the small
number of female gun owners who admitted gun ownership, only 40%
said they would register all their guns. There is less than one
chance in one hundred that this difference in willingness to
register between the two sexes was a result of sampling error.
Propensity to register also varies widely by region of Canada
(Table 2), with 86% of Quebeckers and only
58% of prairie gun owners saying they would register all their
guns. There is less than one chance in twenty-five that the
differences in willingness to register among regions was a result
of sampling error.
The reasons for reluctance to register are not hard to
understand. Many farmers have an old Lee-Enfield rifle, worth
about $60, and they may be reluctant to pay $60 every five years
for a possession licence, plus registration fees, to register
their $60 rifle. Others, perhaps including a fair number of
women, do not want anyone to know they have a firearm for
self-defense. Still others are concerned that their firearms will
become prohibited - after all the government just prohibited by
Order in Council over half a million legally owned and registered
handguns, and says it wants to prohibit two kinds of rifles
commonly used for hunting and sporting purposes as soon as Bill
C-68 comes into force - so this concern comes from seeing what
has already happened, and what has been proposed.
No one seriously argues that criminals will register their
guns. The black market appears to be large enough to replace
those few guns that cannot be stolen because registrants store
their firearms more securely (Criminal
Intelligence Service Canada).
The argument has been made that before domestic conflict
arises, the participants are law abiding and will register their
guns. But, "Husbands who kill their wives typically have
criminal records and/or substance abuse problems and/or are
experiencing economic difficulties. They have a history of
violent disputes with their wives that has not been made known to
the police. (Dansys p.47)"
That many people in this situation will register their firearms
seems unlikely, as Table 3 demonstrates,
because only 46% of persons in common law unions, where the rate
of uxoricide is eight times higher and the rate of slain husbands
is 15 times higher than in registered unions (Wilson and Daly, p.
9), said they would register all their guns. Also, single people,
who account for 45% of those accused of homicide (Fedorowycz p. 15), are
significantly less likely (61%) than the average (71.1%) to say
they will register all their guns. Thus the people most likely to
misuse guns are those who are least likely to register them.
There is less than one chance in fifty that the differences in
willingness to register by marital status was caused by sampling
error.
As a former police officer, I cannot imagine a rational police
officer placing any trust in a system that is likely to be
ignored by the most dangerous elements in society.
Let's take as the registration goal an estimated 8 million
firearms in Canada. In any given year there are just over 4,000
misuses - just under 3,000 firearms lost or stolen (which would
include the legal arms used in criminal acts), 1100 suicides,
just under 250 homicides and about 60 fatal accidents. Taken
together this means that 1/20th of 1% of the firearms are
misused, 99.95% are not of interest to the legal system.
Registering the 99.95% which are of no interest, to find the
0.05%, is like trying to find a needle in a haystack by
registering every piece of hay.
Over the last five years only 1% of applications for the
Firearms Acquisition Certificate have been refused (R.C.M.P). People who are
likely to be refused don't apply (Scarff,
et. al.). If people who have criminal records, mental
instability or domestic conflict have a gun, (perhaps inherited,
perhaps bought before 1978, perhaps stolen) they are unlikely to
apply for a possession licence, because, upon investigation, it
would be refused. Without a possession licence they could not
register their guns. If the government is proposing to issue
licences to all present owners without serious investigation,
then many who are likely to misuse their guns will become
licensed owners, and registration will come to be seen to be a
failure.
The police will be required to record and approve every
transaction between firearms owners (C-68, 30-33), who they have
already, presumably, investigated and approved. This will
necessarily require a great deal of time and paper work. There
are only 56,774 (1991 - Campbell) police
officers in Canada, who are already fully occupied. Investigating
millions of Canadians, almost 100% of whom will prove to be law
abiding, may be a less efficient use of police resources than
targeting those most likely to misuse firearms (Wright).
Even if 95% of owners registered, an astounding and probably
impossible success rate, the guns most likely to be used for
domestic and criminal homicides will be significantly under
represented in the system.
The notion that suicides and accidents will be reduced by
registration depends on a convoluted and unproven chain of logic.
First the owner has to register. Then, because he has registered
he will be inspired to go out and purchase locks or a safe which
he would not have purchased had he not registered. Then, because
he has registered, he has to consistently keep the firearms out
of the hands of other people in his household who might misuse
them, which he would not have done if he had not registered. One
or two potential suicides may have to find a plastic bag, or a
car in the garage, or a high place because they can't get into
the gun safe, but the overall suicide rate will probably not be
affected. There might possibly be one or two fewer accidental
deaths with safer storage occasioned by registration, but this is
only conjecture. Most of the benefits which might be expected
from registration have already been achieved by the Firearms
Acquisition Certificate system and the Canadian Firearms Safety
Course. The diversion of police resources into the registration
system, for marginal additional benefit, may well mean that there
is less time for investigating and preventing problems, so,
overall, it is unreasonable to expect registration to produce any
net saving of lives.
It is also unreasonable to expect any great number of real
crimes to be solved, or weapons to be usefully traced because of
registration. All but the most careless and dim witted thieves
will drill out the serial number on any gun they steal, making it
untraceable. Instead we can expect a host of technical charges
against gun owners who have not followed this complex law to the
letter.
In the last 20 years the firearms homicide, accident and
suicide rates have all declined, and firearms use in crime is not
increasing (Roberts, p. 19).
There is no evidence that a registration system would, on
balance, make Canadians any safer. There is a great deal of
evidence, from the mail you have received, that the
implementation of a registration system will profoundly alienate
some members of Canadian society. Registration appears to me to
be a lose-lose proposition.
Finally, I would like to quote the Chairman of this Committee
on the subject of universal registration, "... for the ten
million long guns in Canada I believe that a registration scheme
would be unworkable and impractical in comparison with its
potential benefits. (COMMONS DEBATES, April 8, 1976, p. 12627,
Mr. Allmand)
Questions from the 1995 Gun Control Survey, organized by
Professor Gary Mauser of Simon Fraser University. A national
representative sample of 1,505 interviews carried out by Canadian
Facts in January 1995. The overall margin of error for a survey
of this size is ± 2.5%, nineteen times out of twenty. The margin
of error for the sub-sample of gun owners is ± 6%.
TABLE 1 - GUN OWNERS ONLY If the government's proposal to register all firearms becomes law, do you plan on registering all, some, or none of your firearms? |
||
SEX OF RESPONDENT | ||
REGISTER | MALE | FEMALE |
SOME NONE DK | 26.8% | 60.0% |
ALL | 73.2% | 40.0% |
Total Percent | 100% | 100% |
Number of Cases | (224) | (15) |
Chi-Square Significance =
.00599 (c2 p<.01)
TABLE 2 - GUN OWNERS ONLY If the government's proposal to register all firearms becomes law, do you plan on registering all, some, or none of your firearms? |
|||||
REGION OF CANADA | |||||
REGISTER | ATLANTIC | QUEBEC | ONTARIO | PRAIRIES | BC |
SOME NONE DK | 31.7% | 13.6% | 25.5% | 42.4% | 27.1% |
ALL | 68.3% | 86.4% | 74.5% | 57.6% | 72.9% |
Total Percent | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Number of Cases | (41) | (44) | (47) | (59) | (48) |
Chi-Square Significance =
.03014 (c2 p<.04)
TABLE 3 - GUN OWNERS ONLY
If the government's proposal to register all firearms becomes law, do you plan on registering all, some, or none of your firearms? |
||||||
MARITAL STATUS | ||||||
REGISTER |
SINGLE | MARRIED | COMMON LAW | SEPARATED | DIVORCED | WIDOWED |
SOME NONE DK | 39.3% | 23.5% | 53.8% | 33.3% | 60% | |
ALL | 60.7% | 76.5% | 46.2% | 100% | 66.7% | 40% |
Total Percent | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Number of Cases | (28) | (170) | (13) | (3) | (15) | (10) |
Chi-Square Significance
= .01645 (c2 p<.02)
REFERENCES
1994. "Concordia's 'Gun Control' Petition: Ignorance of
the Law is the Only Excuse." Presented in the Firearms and
Society section of the Law and Society annual meeting, Calgary,
14 June 1994.
Campbell, Gayle and Bryan Reingold.
1994. "Private Security and Public Policing in
Canada." Juristat: Service Bulletin. Canadian Centre
for Justice Statistics. 14:10. March.
Criminal Intelligence Service Canada.
1994. "Smuggling Activities in Canada," Organized Crime Committee Report, Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police.
(p.5) "Weapons smuggling is developing into a serious problem. The demand for and use of illegal Weapons on the streets of Canada has increased dramatically. This commodity is readily available through legal and illegal sources in the United States.
A recent undercover investigation in Ontario, named Project
Gunrunner, revealed that most guns used by Canadian criminals are
smuggled in from the United States."
1992. "Domestic Homicides Involving the Use of Firearms." Research And Development Directorate, Department of Justice Canada. WD1992-20e. March 1992.
(p. 26) "Respondents were asked if the accused was
violating any laws, regulations, or court orders by possessing a
firearm. ... In over three-quarters of the cases the police
responded that they had no knowledge of any gun violation.
More than one-half of the handguns used, however, were not in the
legal possession of the accused prior to the incident."
Note, the police did not investigate whether the long guns were
legally owned, they just did not know.
1972. "The Polls: Gun Control." Public Opinion Quarterly. 36:455-469.
(p. 456) Survey respondents incorrectly deny gun ownership.
1994. "Homicide in Canada - 1993." Juristat:
Service Bulletin. Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics.
14:15. August.
Kennett, Lee and James LaVerne Anderson.
1975. The Gun in America: The Origins of a National Dilemma. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.
(p. 253) Survey respondents incorrectly deny gun ownership.
1991. Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
(p. 457) "At this point, it seems reasonable to conclude
that true rates of household gun ownership [in the U.S.] could
easily be 10 to 20% higher. That is, the rates might be 5-10
percentage points above the reported rates averaging around
46%."
1983 - 1993. Annual Firearms Report to the Solicitor General of Canada, R.C.M.P.
Annual reports.
1991. Firearm Ownership in Canada. Research and Development Directorate, Policy, Programs and Research Sector, Department of Justice Canada. TR1991-8A, March.
Survey of 10,103 Canadian households, with interviews in the
2,341 households where the person answering the phone said there
was a firearm in the house, and the 1,271 owners in the sample.
1994. Public Knowledge of Crime and Justice: An Inventory of Canadian Findings. Technical Report, Department of Justice Canada. TR1994-15e.
(p.19) "Another widespread belief is that the incidence
of crimes involving firearms has increased recently. There are no
statistical data to support this view."
Scarff, Elizabeth, Ted Saharchuk, Terrence Jacques and Michael McAuley.
1981. "Evaluation of the Canadian Gun Control Legislation. First Progress Report. Research Division, Solicitor General Canada. js 22-56/1981E.
(P. 86) "Perhaps the most critical reason for the low
refusal rates [for FACs] is that FAC applicants consist of those
individuals most likely to meet the screening criteria. The
'criminal element' is not applying."
Wilson, Margo and Martin Daly.
1994. "Spousal Homicide." Juristat: Service
Bulletin. Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. 14:8.
March.
1992. "Homicide in Canada 1991." Juristat: Service Bulletin. Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. 12:18. October.
(p. 8) "Approximately 46% of all homicides in 1991 occurred during the commission of another criminal offense. (p. 10) "Consistent with other years, 64% of all victims of homicide were male and 36% were female." (p. 13) "in 1991, 45% of homicide victims had a criminal history: 20% for violent offenses; 12% for property offenses; 4% for drug offenses, and; a further 8% had a criminal record for other Criminal Code or Federal Statute offenses. Fifty-seven percent of male victims and 21% of female victims had a previous criminal record." "In 1991, 44% of all immediate family related homicides involved a previous history of domestic violence." (p. 15) "Seventy percent of male accused and 40% of female accused had a previous criminal record."