Van Police Chief Chu’s $4M/year Gun-registry cost and other bull

It was stunning to listen to Vancouver Police Chief Jim Chu cite blatantly misleading “facts” about the Long-Gun Registry in his recent press conferences:

1) “police were advised of a situation where an individual had quite quickly accumulated over 57 firearms… a follow-up was conducted to ensure public safety and that the guns were purchased and stored for a legitimate purpose. Without the long gun registry, this intelligence could not have been confirmed.”

Chu doesn’t bother mentioning if this person is a collector or dealer and certainly didn’t bother to include that it’s not illegal to own 57 guns.

2) “The untold story of the value of the gun registry is the unknown number of spousal homicides, accidental deaths, suicides-by-cop or other potentially fatal interactions it has prevented”

Untold??!! You mean unproven and unsubstantiated right?

3) “Chu spoke to reporters about the need to keep the registry, which police say they use an average of 2,700 times per day in BC”

The most blatant lie that has been countless times proven misleading as all  police checks automatically trip a Registry count.

4) “$4 million a year for the program”

Finally, the media is starting to question this figure:

Colby Cosh from Macleans – “The Firearms Centre in Miramichi has 240 federal employees, guys! $4 million wouldn’t cover 12 weeks of payroll expenses, right?”

Globe and Mail editorial – “The source of this estimate of $4-million appears to be a badly written line in the RCMP’s 2010 evaluation of the Canadian Firearms Program”

Was it pure coincidence that Chu received a 3-year contract extension from the Vancouver Police Board (chaired by lefty Mayor Gregor Robertson) the day after his 2nd pro-Registry press conference in just 2 weeks? His current contract wasn’t due to expire until 2012…what was the rush?

Mark Hasiuk of the Vancouver Courier lays out the huge conflict of interest Chu is in but won’t declare:

“Chu spoke for the department, and the Canadian Association of Chief’s of Police (CACP), a lobbying organization funded in part by CGI Group Inc., the major software supplier for—you guessed it—the national gun registry. Chu, who refused to be interviewed for this story, sits on the CACP board of directors. On its own, this obvious conflict of interest disqualifies Chu from impartial comment.”
If our national police chiefs mislead and lie about the Gun-registry, which issues can we count on them being honest about?
Advertisements

9 Responses to “Van Police Chief Chu’s $4M/year Gun-registry cost and other bull”

  1. ridenrain Says:

    I’m also sick and tired of hearing Bill Good on CKNW promote the registry, global warming and every other cause-celeb that comes along.
    Are there any good talk radio stations in BC?

    • Rick Says:

      There are no good stations in BC. But from 7 – 9 pm, you can get Charles Adler on 980 CKNW AM. For a real treat and from some parts of Vancouver and the lower mainland, you can hear CHQR 790 AM out of Bellingham; Glenn Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity. Every time I strain to listen through the static one word keeps going through my head: FREEDOM. Why oh why are Canadians not free enough to hear US radio. CKNW is boring pablum compared to CHQR.

  2. TangoJuliette Says:

    “The untold story of the value of the gun registry is the unknown number of spousal homicides, accidental deaths, suicides-by-cop or other potentially fatal interactions it has prevented” ~ Insp. Chu

    And these are the folks who mock the “prisons for ‘unreported’ criminal activities?”

    BC law enforcement officers access the registry more than 2,700 times PEAR DAY?? That’s more than 20% of the reported 13,000 ‘hits’ daily, nationwide!

    My guess is that large provinces like Ontario and Quebec, both heavily populated SHOULD be reporting 5,000 to 7,000 daily ‘hits,’ on a per capita basis. The remaining provinces must have extrremely law-abiding citizens, with just 50 to 200 ‘hits’ daily, to reach the national total of 13,000.

    There’s gonna havta be whole lotta ‘splainin’ to do ,Lucy!

    OR

    somebody, somewhere is cooking the books.

    ttfn
    tj
    t.e.&o.e.

  3. Randal Says:

    In today´s Globe editorial, they cite the police report in more detail where it states that the LGR costs $66 Million annually to operate.

    The Liberal Globe and Mail calls for putting the LGR out of its sorry $2 Billion misery.

  4. Michael Harkov Says:

    All of the Liberal MPs are going to vote to kill the registry today. This virtually guarantees it –

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/gunregistry/article/864892–tragedy-makes-gun-vote-personal-for-liberal-mp?bn=1

    This terrible trajedy, in no way of course, would have been prevented by the LGR. But that won’t matter. Quite literally, 11th hour optics, thanks to the Toronto Star, is going to win the day for the supporters of the LGR.

  5. Gabby in QC Says:

    « Globe and Mail editorial – “The source of this estimate of $4-million appears to be a badly written line in the RCMP’s 2010 evaluation of the Canadian Firearms Program” »

    The line may have been “badly written” but it was even more badly read and interpreted by the media.

    Excuse me if I blow my own horn, but on September 5, 2010 over at BLY I posted this:
    http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/08/26/rcmp-report-long-gun-registry-cost-effective-efficient/ :

    “The report found that the Canadian Firearms Program is operating efficiently at a cost of $1.1 million to $3.6 million per year, and contains over 40 pages of analysis of the effectiveness of the firearms registry in both urban and rural areas.”

    And yet … this is what I read in the ACTUAL report here http://www.scribd.com/doc/36633614/En-Firearms-Evaluation-Report [on page 15]:

    Table 2: Direct and Indirect costs incurred by the CFP/RCMP and federal partners in the administration of the CFP.

    Actual Past Total Expenditures ’95 to ‘07: $1,106.1 billion
[direct & indirect costs, the latter being costs incurred by other federal depts & reimbursed by Canada Firearms Program]

    Actual Total Expenditures ’07 – ‘08: $63.4 Million

    Actual Total Expenditures ’08 – ‘09: $67.5 Million
    Planned Total Expenditures ’09 – ’10: $76.5 M

    Planned Total Expenditures ’10 – ’11: 76.5 M$

    Then on Sept. 7, again at BLY, I posted this (slightly revised):
    What the pro-registry lobby, including the media, focussed on however, is this passage found on page 66 of the report :
    “… Expenditures on the CFP [Canadian Firearms Program] have decreased since it has come under the RCMP and are expected to continue in this downward direction. This serves to validate the rationale given in 2006 for moving the CFP to the RCMP, with a $10 million reduction in the overall budget. An exercise that was recently completed to separate out the costs of registration from its supportive link with licensing has demonstrated that portions of the program are actually operating at a much lower cost program than first presumed, even by the RCMP itself. For instance, the gun registration portion of the CFP has been determined, by independent sources, in terms of cost savings to the CFP, at a range of $1.195-$3.65 million for the initial year, and subsequent years will range from $1.57-$4.03 million depending on the classification certification that will still be required. …”

    In other words, unless I did not understand that paragraph …

    • the cost of running the registry has decreased since the RCMP has been mandated to do it.

    • the actual and projected costs of running the registry are given on page 15 of the report (see above)

    • the savings — the difference between what it used to cost to run it and what it now costs under the RCMP — range from $1 to $4 million.

    THAT is what the media has interpreted as what it costs to run the registry — i.e. they cited the cost savings rather than the actual cost of running it.

    The media failed BIG TIME to inform the public about the RCMP report.

  6. Stan Says:

    Why wasn’t the Conservative party correcting the lies about the real cost of the registry?
    Their communication strategy of ‘osmosis’ simply does not work.

  7. Mary T Says:

    So what if the finance minister says, this is the figure the experts have given us so for future years only 4M will be allotted to the LGR. Then listen for the truth to come out and turn more people off keeping the registry.
    I think the coalition played right into the PM’s trap, got them out in the open, showed their promises are useless, brought out the sp interest groups to spout off misinformation.
    Iggy/layton will have a hard time convincing voters in the next election their word means anything.
    Nice to know Linda Duncan will be gone without a pension.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: