Evidence of meeting #11 for Public Safety and National Security in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was owners.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT
And that's something that would happen thousands of times a day across this country, in checking--
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT
Would officers ever stop a vehicle and proceed with a check without accessing a registry? If so, how do they stay safe doing that?
12:40 p.m.
Sergeant, As an Individual
When you say “accessing a registry”, what are you asking?
12:40 p.m.
Sergeant, As an Individual
Well, they don't. The point that I've tried to make--and I speak for my jurisdiction--is that we conduct checks on CPIC and on the individual just in running the plate. That may not be the individual in the vehicle; that's just to whom it is registered. Those queries come back, and from there on, if an officer feels the need, he can delve deeper into the individual he's dealing with.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you, Mr. Grismer.
We'll now move to the official opposition.
Mr. Harris, go ahead, please, for seven minutes.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all of the presenters here today. It was most interesting to hear the various views.
Sergeant Grismer, first of all, I take it that when you were certified as an expert in firearms and you dealt with prosecutions in the Saskatchewan court, it was in relation to the operation of firearms and training. You weren't certified as an expert in firearms control and registration policies? So it was related to ballistics or the use of firearms in a particular criminal act. Is that correct?
12:40 p.m.
Sergeant, As an Individual
When they qualified me, the courts gave me very broad latitude. In addition to the operation and classification of firearms, I also provide the crown with opinions on aspects of the law pertinent to a particular case at hand.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
So it wasn't in terms of policy. For example, when the paper you gave us says that the registry can do nothing to prevent the criminals from obtaining or using firearms, that's not part of your expertise in terms of an opinion you would offer to a court, for example.
12:40 p.m.
Sergeant, As an Individual
That's true. I've not been qualified by the court with it. That comes from 25 years of being on the street as a front-line police officer and as a person who worked in major crimes for a period of time.
12:40 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
I take it then, from that statement and your comment, that you would disagree with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police firearms program evaluation, which says that “without registration there is a failure of accountability on behalf of the owner, and it is registration that drives accountability. Without registration, anyone can buy and sell firearms privately and there would be no record.”
You disagree with that. In your opinion, that it is a false statement and, based on your experience, that is not accurate.
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Okay. Thank you.
They also say "registration further helps to reduce the general proliferation of firearms. This is very useful in investigating licensed owners in the trafficking of firearms to unlicensed owners. Without the registry it becomes almost unenforceable."
Do you disagree with that?
12:45 p.m.
Sergeant, As an Individual
I submit, sir, that there are other tools by which to do that.
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
When they say, "Firearms registration is a critical component of the entire firearms program," you disagree with that as well?
12:45 p.m.
Sergeant, As an Individual
I do. As I said in my presentation, I believe that training, screening, and licensing of owners are the cornerstones of it.
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Yes, and I wanted to get to that actually. So the training, screening, and licensing are the cornerstones of it, but as a police officer, wouldn't you be concerned about the proliferation of firearms? Wouldn't you be concerned about the smuggling of firearms? Wouldn't you be concerned about all sorts of firearms in use throughout the country? Wouldn't that be a cornerstone of public safety when it comes to firearms?
Training is for those who seek it. Licensing and public education are also for those who seek it. These are useful, but if you're saying you'd ignore the other aspects of enforcement and proliferation, the present legislation--and I assume that you read it--says that a person may transfer a firearm that's neither prohibited nor restricted if the transferee holds a licence. There's no mechanism for enforcement. In fact, if one actually voluntarily goes to the registrar to see whether there's any particular issues with respect to the proposed licensee, there's a provision that says that “neither the Registrar or his or her delegate nor a designated person shall retain any record of a request made under subsection (1)”.
So it seems that this legislation is designed to ensure that firearms can be transferred without being traced, without being tracked. They can go anywhere. Even though there's a voluntary requirement here, there's no mechanism to enforce it, and we're talking about this ability with regard to unrestricted and not prohibited firearms, including semi-automatics and sawed-off shotguns that are manufactured as sawed-off shotguns. In other words, they're not manufactured big and cut short.
These can proliferate without any restriction whatsoever. In your opinion, that's okay because licensing, training, and public education are really all that's necessary.
12:45 p.m.
Sergeant, As an Individual
I want to take you back to the first part of your dissertation. You talked about the traffic in firearms and firearms being smuggled. The firearms that are being smuggled into Canada from the United States are not long guns, rifles, and shotguns, but handguns.
The gangster on the street doesn't want a big, unwieldy firearm. He wants something small, something he can hide, and it becomes a status symbol to him to have that in his possession.
Those firearms, sir, are restricted and have been restricted since 1934. We still see a huge proliferation of them on our streets. We still do drug raids and find unregistered handguns and firearms that have been smuggled into this country from the United States. We're not finding rifles and shotguns smuggled in. Those are not what the gang underworld uses.
If I run into firearms, by far handguns or prohibited weapons are what I encounter most—things that have been sawed-off and chopped up, and some very crudely done.
So do I think the registry is going to stop any of that stuff? No. Do I think the registry of long guns will stop any of that? Absolutely not.