Thank you.
I'm glad that you also caught that seemingly careless use of very important terms in the control of firearms. The licensing is one aspect; the gun registry is a different issue altogether.
Every individual, before they can acquire a firearm, whether it's restricted or non-restricted, must obtain a licence. You go through the testing process, and then there are other applications that you have to make, and your background is checked to ensure that we can, as much as humanly possible, weed out those who should not have firearms for one reason or another. I think those reasons are clear, and I don't need to go into them.
The gun registry has nothing to do with that. The gun registry is after the fact. It is about somebody who has a licence already and registers that firearm, or somebody who doesn't register the firearm at all and doesn't use the licensing provisions either. Most of the homicides are in that category, by individuals who are using handguns illegally and causing the concern that many citizens feel.
My wish is that we would have a clear discussion on the tremendous steps that we have taken as a government in terms of gun control and actually controlling guns from coming into the hands of criminals or of those who are otherwise unfit to own a firearm. It's disappointing that for political purposes, the distinction between the various components of gun control on the one hand and the registry on the other hand are blurred. That does nothing to forward a proper discussion about what the most effective mechanisms are for ensuring that gun crime is reduced.