I would encourage Ms. Ratansi to table that paper. I'd be very interested in reading it. I share the questions about the ability of any group to show attribution between a registry and lives saved, considering that the firearms office has not been able to make that attribution itself.
I'd like to discuss this continual statistic you've referred to that officers access the registry 5,000 times a day. Supporters of the registry have consistently used this statistic, and I believe it to be very misleading.
I've spoken to numerous officers—some are very close friends of mine—and have asked them about it. I have not been able to find a single officer who has ever accessed the gun registry, nor have I been able to find a single officer who knows anyone who ever has accessed the registry. In fact, I had one officer, who's very competent serving in the community, who told me he wouldn't even know how to access the registry, and he's very well trained and highly respected in the community. This is someone for whom I have a lot of respect.
So I did a little bit of research. What I found is that this statistic, 5,000 times a day, is not the number of times a day an officer actually goes into the system and says, “H'mm. I'd like to investigate whether so-and-so possesses a firearm.” It includes all of the incidental occasions when someone's name in the registry is brought up for a different reason. For example, if someone is brought over to the side of the road for cross-walking and their record is brought up and they happen to own a firearm, that is counted in this 5,000 number.
I would like to know how the 5,000 number has any pertinence whatsoever to the discussion on the registry when it includes all of these incidental occasions that records are brought up.
I have had this confirmed by officials in the department, and I would be very encouraged to hear your response to it, because if it's not the case, then there is a disconnect in the information we're being given.