Anyone skeptical about the value of the gun registry should read the long-delayed RCMP report reluctantly released this week by Stephen Harper's federal government.

Jack Layton in particular should make his New Democratic MPs read it — particularly those who plan to provide the Conservatives with enough votes to kill the registry when the issue comes to a vote next month.

I own rifles and admit that, until now, I hadn't been entirely convinced the registry was useful.

It was established in response to the 1989 massacre of 14 Montreal female engineering students by a deranged shooter. But as the Dawson College shooting 17 years later demonstrated, simply requiring people to register their guns can't stop mass murder.

Indeed, as a mechanism for dealing with gun violence, the registry always seemed beside the point to me.

The RCMP report explains why I was wrong.

First, it points out that the vast majority of firearm-related deaths in Canada are the result of rifles and shotguns — not handguns.

For those of us in living in big cities like Toronto, that may seem counterintuitive. And it is true that handguns account for twice as many homicides as shotguns and rifles.

But in terms of overall gun-related deaths, handguns are pikers. When suicides and accidents are added in, long guns account for about two-thirds of the total.

The report also provides a dose of reality to those who assume gun crime is purely an urban phenomenon. Rural gun violence, the report notes, is very real — and very much associated with hunting weapons like rifles.

In rural areas, it says, rifles and shotguns have “played a role in creating a climate of control and intimidation” among women surveyed.

Second, the gun reforms have worked. In 1996, before these reforms were instituted, 63 people were murdered with long guns in rural areas. By 2005, the number had dropped to 50.

In 1996, 23 people across Canada killed their spouses (mainly women) with long guns. By 2007, that number was only eight.

This was not simply the result of Canada becoming a nicer place. Between 1995 and 2006, the overall homicide rate stayed constant.

True, it is not immediately clear how much of the improvement can be credited to laws that require gun owners to be licensed (which the Harper government does not want to repeal) and how much is the result of registering weapons themselves.

But the RCMP report argues that both elements of gun reform are inseparable.

It calls the registry “a critical component of the entire firearm program” that allows the authorities to follow individual weapons and ensure they remain in the hands of licensed owners.

In fact, the real problem of the registry may be that it is not robust enough. As Abbotsford, B.C., chief Const. Bob Rich noted to a Commons committee earlier this year, the registry can tell police who owns long guns. But it does not require information on where these weapons are actually kept.

That the gun registry is unpopular is a given. An Angus Reid poll last week found that 44 per cent of Canadians think it ineffective and want it scrapped. Only 35 per cent would keep it.

In places like rural Saskatchewan, where the NDP is desperate to regain seats, animosity to the registry is even higher — which explains Layton's delicate dance. (He personally supports the registry but doesn't want to force his caucus to agree.)

Still, critics of the registry should get a grip. As government interference goes, this is minor stuff. Ottawa is not trying to steal our vital bodily fluids.

And, as the RCMP report makes clear, the lives the registry saves are worth the relatively paltry $1 million to $4 million spent each year to keep it going.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Thomas Walkom's column appears Wednesday and Saturday.

This week's RCMP report has convinced me the gun registry is useful. Let's hope Jack Layton's New Democrat MPs see the light.

Thomas Walkom's column appears Wednesday and Saturday.