PDA

View Full Version : Research Help Needed!!



CivilAdvantage
11-09-2014, 09:26 PM
Does anyone have any information on the "daily" CPIC check we gun owners go through everyday. I've been told that by the CFP and read the info on the website but I'm looking for more information. Does anyone have anything else???

Thanks.

RangeBob
11-09-2014, 09:42 PM
It's called the "continuous eligibility program".

There are at least two sources of data
a) weapons prohibition orders.
b) Firearms Interest Police (FIP).

Courts enter weapons prohibition orders, and they're checked against the PAL list, and anyone who's on both is discovered, and local police are notified and they promptly run out and collect the PAL card. According to Ed Burlew, Canadian police are extremely good at this -- on the order of 100% of PAL cards are seized. If you see someone with a PAL card, and it was ever valid (not fake), you can rest comfortably that there hasn't been a weapons prohibition order against this person.

The FIP is entered by local police throughout Canada. Networking every police station in Canada to do this cost a hundred million dollars or so -- and wasn't in the original plans or estimates for the Canadian Firearms Program. It was created when there was a famicide involving a woman who refused to issue a complaint against her husband although there had been several domestic assault investigations by police, who subsequently applied for and got a PAL. I assume bureaucrats decided on their own that they needed such a system -- but I have no proof of that.

Since the FIP isn't organized by PAL #s, every day (possibly several times a day) the list of PALers names is compared against the new entries in the FIP database looking for PALers names amongst the many names that are there (mostly non PALers), be they suspect, victim, witness, or bystander interviewed on the street; corresponding local police reports are then read by Canadian Firearms Centre staff to decide if this is grounds for a PAL revocation. If so, they send the local police out to get the PAL card.

I note that some places suggest that police enter data directly into FIP, whereas elsewhere I saw an early database schema definition for the FIP and it was incredibly small mostly a few pointers to other records implying the data is actually entered into normal CPIC or paper records rather than actually in FIP.

RangeBob
11-09-2014, 09:45 PM
Continuous-eligibility screening

All current holders of firearms licences, POL and PAL, are recorded in the Canadian Firearms Information System (CFIS). CFIS automatically checks with the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) every day to determine whether a licence holder has been the subject of an incident report in CPIC. All matches generate a report entitled Firearms — Interest Police (FIP), that is automatically forwarded to the CFO in the relevant province for follow-up. Some of these reports require no further action, but some lead to review of the individual’s licence and may result in the revocation of the firearms licence. Continuous-eligibility screening reduces the likelihood that an individual who has shown they are a risk to public safety will be permitted to retain possession of firearms.


The following Figure (8) shows the number of confirmed FIP reports by province.

Province/Territory 2007

Newfoundland and Labrador 2,116
Prince Edward Island 278
Nova Scotia 5,588
New Brunswick 3,671
Quebec 37,302
Ontario 19,924
Manitoba 4,348
Saskatchewan 2,877
Alberta 8,766
British Columbia 11,426
Yukon 273
Northwest Territories 216
Nunavut 589
Total 97,374

-- Commissioner of Firearms 2007 Report

RangeBob
11-09-2014, 09:48 PM
The daily CPIC run has parameters built into it with concerns regarding your PAL, RPAL.
They are looking for anything under the Firearms Act that would allow revocation of the PAL or RPAL.
Not all charges fall under this.
If you have an argument with someone and the Police attend the scene, no charges are laid, but a report goes in.
You just generated a FIP for the next day and depending on the circumstances you may be called in to explain.
If you got charged with stealing a candy bar at the local store, a FIP would be generated on CPIC the next day, but since it does not directly relate to the Firearms Act and your PAL or RPAL, there would be no hit under those parameters.
Thats the way it was explained to me by the Halton Police Service when I had a Firearms Business Permit.
The parameters change as the Firearms Act changes.
I am not qouting exact parameters here, just the example that I was told.
Remember they are not running a CPIC check for Vulnerable Records Check.
That theft charge as quoted above (candy bar-theft under) would score a hit on the Vulnerable Records Check but not the Firearms Act.
-- cigar_man;33852

Then we come to the CPIC database which records all convictions and the probation and prohibition orders associated with sentencing.
These orders are archived in Canada. In fact the court is under an obligation to sen each such order to the CFO and the registrar of firearms, in any event there are police investigation programs run daily on these data bases to find out oif a licensed person has had an order against him or her.
There is also the FIP database. That is Firearms Interest Police. That is a police tool on CPIC. No judge has the power to alter such an entry. It creates a flag on the registrars data base and the CFO database. There are no several hundred thousand Canadians on that database. A person is on the data base if found guilty of a gun related or violent crime. As well sometimes the victim of a violent or gun related crime is entered. If you think you are on that improperly you can write tot he chief of police in the area and ask to be removed, this has been successful.
-- sweetheart;10438156

RangeBob
11-09-2014, 09:53 PM
One other factor dramatically altered the project’s scope. A shooting spree in 1996 in British Columbia highlighted an obvious flaw in the planned licensing and registry system. In that instance, the killer applied for a license to purchase a gun and was approved, even though his estranged wife had complained to police several times that he had threatened to kill her. Because the man had not been convicted, the incidents were not recorded in the national police database, the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC).
The government then decided to include all violent incidents reported to police, whether they resulted in a criminal conviction or not, as grounds for further reviewing a license application. This involved tapping into the computer records of every police agency in the country and having information on any reported threats, domestic violence or related incidents pushed out to a new central database, the Firearm Interest Police System (FIPS). This database in turn would be integrated with CPIC and the new firearm registry in Ottawa.
Instead of a simple database where citizens registered their firearms, the scope of the initiative had been expanded to that of a large computer networking project.
-- MEL DUVALL, "Armed Robbery ... A national computerized firearm registry in Canada was supposed to cost taxpayers $2 million. Instead, it has held them up for more than $1 billion"

RangeBob
11-09-2014, 10:00 PM
Licences are checked for eligibility on an ongoing basis in different ways:
- As soon as a new violent incident is logged in FIP, the system automatically searches existing licence holders in the CFRS for a match and alerts the CFO of this development. This could result in a licence being revoked.
- Court records of relevance to section 5 of the Firearms Act (i.e. prohibition orders) are manually fed into CFRS on a daily basis by CFRO staff. This information is not only used to flag existing licence holders, but also serves as another primary eligibility check on new applicants coming into the system.
- Also, the CFRS maintains other key information used in the ongoing eligibility screening process such as firearms events and spousal notification tables.

-- Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. "Review of the personal information handling practices of the Canadian Firearms Program", August 29, 2001

[note: courts weren't notifying the CFO's about ALL prohibition orders at the time -- and years later the process was changed because PALs were issued or not revoked with people who had prohibition orders.]

RangeBob
11-09-2014, 10:01 PM
Continuous Eligibility Screening of Firearms Licence Holders

All firearms licences are recorded in the Canadian Firearms Information System. If a licensed individual
is the subject of a police report involving violence that is recorded on the Canadian Police Information
Centre (CPIC), an interface between CPIC and the CFP database ensures that a report is automatically
sent to the Chief Firearms Officer of their province or territory for further review and investigation.


Table 11: Firearms Interest Police (FIP) Events
Province/TerritoryProviTerritory rearms Interest PNFIPs
Newfoundland and Labrador 3,076
Prince Edward Island 297
Nova Scotia 4,806
New Brunswick 4,152
Quebec 31,808
Ontario 39,834
Manitoba 9,471
Saskatchewan 6,856
Alberta 4,484
British Columbia 15,266
Yukon 695
Northwest Territories 81
Nunavut 0
Total 120,826

-- Commissioner of Firearms 2012 Report

RangeBob
11-09-2014, 10:04 PM
privacy, parking tickets
JUNE 6, 2005 –TO IRČNE ARSENEAU, DIRECTOR, COMMUNICATIONS AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS FROM AND KEN McCARTHY, REGISTRAR OF FIREARMS FROM PIERRE RIOPEL, FIP COORDINATOR:
“I have followed up on the Ontario Stats and the reason why the CFRO query stats have gone up so dramatically is as follows:
Toronto Metro Telecommunications had requested a change in their Intergraph Dispatch System that would auto query all address responses that was returned from their records management system. The requested change was never fully researched and for some reason was implemented as an emergency maintenance issue. Toronto Metro Technical Security Branch was contacted and they stated they are going to remove this feature ASAP. The address query responses from CFRO are not being passed on to anyone. There is a privacy issue about this type of query. Note that the CFRO auto query of addresses is based on any valid address query response returned through their Intergraph System query.
This means that if a parking ticket had a valid address and was returned the Intergraph system, it would generate a CFRO address query.
There is nothing here and the Ontario stats should return to normal (4,000 to 5,000) queries per week in CFRO once the auto query through Intergraph is removed.”
hxxp://www.cdnshootingsports.org/police_use_of_registry_exaggerated.html

RangeBob
11-09-2014, 10:11 PM
April 5, 1996 - In Vernon, BC Rajwar Gakhal and 8 members of her family are murdered by her estranged husband, who then commits suicide. Chahal, 30, locked in a bitter divorce fight with Rajwar, obtained two guns -- despite allegations of domestic violence. Rajwar had told the RCMP about Chahal's threats against her after the couple's nine-month arranged marriage failed but, in fear of retribution, she asked police not to press charges. RCMP said Chahal's gun permit was approved because he had no criminal record.

The Coalition For Gun Control raised a number of questions about the way in which the RCMP processed the murderer's gun application. An inquest and inquiry are called. That one case dramatically altered the Canadian Firearms Program's scope, because it highlighted a flaw in the planned licensing and registry system.

The Canadian Firearms Program then decided to include all violent incidents reported to police, whether they resulted in a criminal conviction or not, as grounds for further reviewing a license application (as well as adding spousal permission to applications and renewals, and references, and telephone interviews). This involved tapping into the computer records of every police agency in the country and having information on any reported threats, domestic violence or related incidents
pushed out to a new central database, the Firearm Interest Police System (FIPS). This database in turn would be integrated with CPIC and the new firearm registry in Ottawa. Instead of a simple database where citizens registered their firearms, the scope of the initiative had been expanded to that of a large computer networking project. According to the Justice Department, that cost $60.9-million for network communications and some advertising, not including software, training, or ongoing federal and municipal costs.

================


The very fact they cross reference us law abiding licensed gun holders every day against newly laid criminal charges
The bar is lower than that.
If your name appears in FIP (Firearms Interest Police database) that day, then you get checked.
FIP gets new charges, but also accusations and complaints without charge. That was the intent of why it was set up.
FIP also gets witnesses to crimes, and people interviewed by front line police who were not witnesses [occasionally?], even victims of crimes, as discovered by a FOI (freedom of information) request by an MP years ago.
FIP contains unsubstantiated and derogatory information, unproven charges or allegations, hearsay, records that are older than 5 years, incidents and charges that have been cleared or acquitted, duplicate entries as well as information about witnesses, victims of crime and various other associated subjects. People are unaware that they are being flagged in FIP as possible risks to public safety. Also, inaccurate information on FIP that has already been the subject of a previous investigation and cleared, is used over and over. [I understand they're trying to not put in witnesses and victims, an ongoing effort]

FIP, and the networking it required to get over 900 law enforcement agencies across Canada connected, was part of the reason for the billion dollar boondoggle. What's not included in the costs are the compliance effort required by local front line officers, and the programming effort at the 900+ law enforcement agencies to attempt to create these FIP entries using an automated extract program (which is part of the reason that garbage ends up in the database).

" RCMP and Surete du Quebec sources verify that there is a 50% error rate in the Firearms Interest Police (FIP) database."
-- http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/CPA01.htm

The FIP was never mentioned or envisioned during the creation of the Firearms Act.
It was created because of one incident:


In 1996, Mark Chahal shot and killed his estranged wife and her family in Vernon, British Columbia, and then committed suicide. An inquest into the murders revealed that, in the months leading up to the shootings, Mr. Chahal had applied for and received a Firearms Acquisition Certificate. He then applied for and received a permit to purchase a semi-automatic handgun, which he registered for target practice. Days before the shooting, Chahal purchased a 10-round magazine for one of his handguns and practised shooting at his gun club several days later.

Throughout this period, Chahal dealt with several different police forces. Since the information was not centrally registered, no pattern could be detected. This information is now maintained in a central database, thereby providing police with a new opportunity to monitor and assess individual situations for increasing risk of harm.

-- hxxp://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/fv-vf/pub/har/annexb.html


FIP was created due to:
a) the broad wording of section 55 of the Firearms Act relating to the "collection of any information reasonably regarded as relevant to determining eligibility";
b) an interpretation of section 5 which reads "5. (1) A person is not eligible to hold a licence if it is desirable, in the interests of the safety of that or any other person, that the person not possess a firearm, a cross-bow, a prohibited weapon, a restricted weapon, a prohibited device, ammunition or prohibited ammunition."

===================

The inquest heard that Mitchell was granted a firearms licence even though a background check showed police complaints had been lodged against him for uttering threats and being involved in a verbal altercation.
Terry Hamilton, chief firearms officer for B.C. and Yukon, testified that since Mitchell was never charged, her office approved his licence application.
"Bad temper is not sufficient grounds to deny somebody a firearms licence,” she said.
A firearms officer has the power to revoke a person’s gun licence if public safety is threatened.
Hamilton said the rifle was returned to Mitchell upon advice from Victoria police. Other Victoria officers are expected to testify later at the inquest.
Lawyers at the inquest suggested that the Office of the Chief Firearms Officer should have dug deeper into Mitchell’s mental- health history before issuing him a gun licence.
Hamilton said the office relies on applicants to disclose whether they have a history of mental health or suicide issues, and that firearms employees do not have access to medical records. As a result of Mitchell’s death, her office hopes to make changes regarding disclosure of mental illnesses.
-- 2013/11/12, re Angus Mitchell , hxxp://www.timescolonist.com/city-police-raised-red-flag-on-victoria-man-before-he-killed-two-people-inquest-hears-1.694567

Back in 2006 was another one that comes to mind. The Newfoundland RCMP gave a gun back to Shawn Skinner, who committed murder/suicide.

The irony is that the first time this happened after the Canadian Firearms Program was started up, something very similar happened. A factor that dramatically altered the Canadian Firearms Program's scope and costs was when a shooting spree in 1996 in British Columbia highlighted an obvious flaw in the planned licensing and registry system. In that instance, the killer applied for a license to purchase a gun and was approved, even though his estranged wife had complained to police several times that he had threatened to kill her. Because the man had not been convicted, the incidents were not recorded in the national police database, the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC). The Canadian Firearms Program then decided to include all violent incidents reported to police, whether they resulted in a criminal conviction or not, as grounds for further reviewing a license application. This involved tapping into the computer records of every police agency in the country and having information on any reported threats, domestic violence or related incidents pushed out to a new central database, the Firearm Interest Police System (FIP). This database in turn would be integrated with CPIC and the new firearm registry in Ottawa. Instead of a simple database where citizens registered their firearms, the scope of the initiative had been expanded to that of a large computer networking project. It ended up adding somewhere in the $400 million to half a billion dollar range to the cost of the project just from the federal taxpayer's budget, and more if you include all the time municipal and provincial police now spend entering the data additionally into FIP. The 1996 case was Mark Vijay Chahal. Family and friends of the victims told newspapers that had the police refused to give the killer a gun licence after his wife filed a complaint against him, the tragedy might have been averted. But the police said they would have been powerless to deny the firearms certificates anyway because the wife Rajwar had asked them not to conduct an investigation into the case because there were no witnesses to the abuse she had suffered and because she feared a probe could aggravate the situation.

RangeBob
11-09-2014, 10:14 PM
http://www.rangebob.com/CanadianPoliceManual/home.htm

CivilAdvantage
11-09-2014, 10:20 PM
"RangeBob to the rescue"...2014's Understatement of the Year

RangeBob
11-09-2014, 10:31 PM
I have no idea how accurate or up to date any of that was -- it's just what I had lying around.
It's probably enough for what you wanted it for though -- worst case you'll be in "tomato is a vegetable" territory.


____________
Stuart: Ooh, Sheldon, I’m afraid you couldn’t be more wrong.
Sheldon: More wrong? Wrong is an absolute state and not subject to gradation.
Stuart: Of course it is. It’s a little wrong to say a tomato is a vegetable, it’s very wrong to say it’s a suspension bridge.
-- Big Bang Theory
[Scientifically speaking, a tomato is definitely a fruit.]

CivilAdvantage
11-09-2014, 10:44 PM
I have no idea how accurate or up to date any of that was -- it's just what I had lying around.
It's probably enough for what you wanted it for though -- worst case you'll be in "tomato is a vegetable" territory.


____________
Stuart: Ooh, Sheldon, I’m afraid you couldn’t be more wrong.
Sheldon: More wrong? Wrong is an absolute state and not subject to gradation.
Stuart: Of course it is. It’s a little wrong to say a tomato is a vegetable, it’s very wrong to say it’s a suspension bridge.
-- Big Bang Theory
[Scientifically speaking, a tomato is definitely a fruit.]

One of your posts quoted "Daily". That's the operative word. Commissioner's Report 2007. That confirmation of when the comparison is performed and all the other database detail should be sufficient. I have one nitpicker on the "Guns in Canada Part 1" YouTube video who want's verification on the "We get our records checked everyday" statement. UPDATE: As I'm writing this, he comes back with this....:


+Civil Advantage Hehe, funny we were both doing the same research at the same time. You beat me to the punch.

this is what I found and it confirms that you were correct


So, after looking tonight I found that you are indeed correct.


Now you have a hard copy to prove this info if ever doubted again.


http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2012/grc-rcmp/PS96-2010-eng.pdf

This government website posted this paragraph.

“Continuous Eligibility Screening of Firearms-Licence Holders”
“As previously outlined, all current firearm licences are recorded in the Canadian Firearms Information System,
which automatically checks with the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) daily to determine if a licence
holder has been the subject of a CPIC incident report anywhere in Canada. Any match generates a Firearms
Interest Police (FIP) report which is automatically forwarded to the relevant Chief Firearms Officer for
follow-up. Some of these reports are “excluded”, which means they require no further action, but some prompt
a review of the individual’s firearms licence and may result in its revocation and the seizure of any firearms.”
This daily continuous-eligibility screening reduces the likelihood that an individual who has been identified
as a potential risk to public safety will be permitted to retain possession of firearms.”

(Although they still state that the total number of FIP Events for 2010 was only 92,000)



This website confirms

https://www.priv.gc.ca/information/fr_010813_e.pdf

Page 10
Licensees are checked for eligibility on an ongoing basis in different ways;
1. As soon as a new violent incident is logged in FIP the system automatically searches existing licence holders in the CFRS for a match and alters the cFO of this development. This could result in a licence being revoked.
2. Court records of relevance to section 5 of the Firearms act (i.e. prohibition orders) are manually fed into CFRS on a daily basis by CFO staff. This information is not only used to flag existing licence holders, but it also serves as another primary eligibility check on new applicants coming into the systems
3. Also, the CFRS maintains other key information used in the ongoing eligibility screening process such as firearms events and spousal notifications tables.

Page 16
On a daily basis, the new FIP entries in the CPIC are compared to information on persons listed in the firearms licence files in the CFRS, including applicants. If there is no match, then nothing happens. If a person in a FIP entry in CPIC later applies for a firearms licence, the FIB entry will be found during the initial licence screening process. If there is a match, CFRS will send a message to the Chief firearms officer of the province or territory in which the incident concerning the licence or applicant too place, indicating there is now a police file that may affect continued eligibility for a firearms licence.

RangeBob
11-09-2014, 11:13 PM
"We get our records checked everyday" 

famous old tales:


150 year old gun owner?

A friend of mine (who will remain nameless), who i've bought a pistol from.

He buys out entire estates where firearms are involved and then sells them off for a profit.

He called in to inquire about a pistol that was in a certain estate. Apparently it wasn't registered to the (now dead) owner of the estate. They also apparently had 2 certificates listed in their system for it but wouldn't tell the person who possessed it now the information. It was then apparently flagged to be destroyed.

After a long bout and numerous phone calls, he was able to identify the 'original' owner of the pistol. Lots of paperwork indicated it was sold to 2 different people and then to the dead estate owner. All of this got faxed in.

What my friend asked of the CFC, "So what your telling me is there was a pistol in your database, with 2 entries, and at least one was registered to a 150 year old man. At no point did any of you wonder how someone could be alive after 150 years legally owning a pistol."

So the moral of the story, even if there is a firearm listed to someone with a birth date of 1900, the CFC wouldn't recognize this as a situation that required someone to at least look at.


I just received an official printout of my registered guns as of Sept 19 2009
There are 7 guns still registered to me, including a handgun, that I have sold and transferred and have the "seller" letter to prove it.
Nice system.
That handgun was sold around Christmas time and the guy has been shooting it weekly at Phoenix Range.....and apparently it still belongs to me.
-- huntinstuff, Location: Alberta, on September 23, 2009


Falsely accused of owning a Prohibited gun, do not pass Go, go directly to jail!



I received a nasty call from the CFC years ago. The lady was irate on the phone as I apparently had a Smith and Wesson Model 19 with a 2" barrel registered to me and I was not 12(6). The gun would have to be turned in for destruction as I was in criminal possession of a prohibited firearm without the proper endorsement on my PAL... After listening quietly to the lady I informed her I did not own a Model 19 with a 2" barrel. After about 30 minutes we established that the Model 19 belonged to some guy in BC and they had registered my 617 with a 6" barrel to him. Just a little error...

Another example is the crap I went through to register a AR15 lower received (stripped) as a complete 16" barreled rifle. Took six years for the change to go through, by the time it did I had sold the uppers and it was a stripped lower again. Sigh.

Got a registration slip in the mail for a SKS one day after purchasing a Russian SKS two weeks previous. The serial number did not match any of mine. Turns out the CFC mis-entered that serial. I got the correct SKS reg slip and all was good. 2 weeks later I bought a SKS with that same serial number, what are the odds?


ALBERTA MP’s FIREARMS LICENCE SAYS HE’S A MORON FROM OKATOKS, ONTARIO: On April 4, 2002, Winnipeg Sun columnist Tom Brodbeck wrote: Canadian Alliance MP Grant Hill is no moron -- unless you listen to the pointy-headed bureaucrats at Ottawa's beleaguered firearm registry office. Hill, an Alberta MP, is a firearm owner. And he got the shock of his life recently when the gun registration people issued him a firearm licence. Hill's full name is Norman Grant Hill. But his newly issued gun licence read "Moron Grant Hill."

But Hill's troubles didn't end there. Not only was he a moron in the eyes of firearms officials, he also found out that, much to his surprise, he no longer lives in Alberta. Apparently he moved to Ontario and didn't even know it. Hill lives in Okotoks, Alta. But the bozos in Ottawa issued him a licence with an address in Okotoks, Ont. So the next time some moron holds up a bank, accidentally drops his firearm in the commission of the crime and leaves it behind, they can go looking for him in Okotoks, Ont.

----

AFTER 3 TRIES THE FIREARMS CENTRE STILL CAN’T GET HIS NAME RIGHT: On April 4, 2002, The Winnipeg Sun (Page 5) reported: Canada's new gun registration centre can't seem to get it right. Wolfram Fuhr, a 59-year-old retired electrician from Birds Hill, owns a .22-calibre rifle that he has tried to properly register three times -- each time unsuccessfully. "I've done everything I can to rectify the problem, but they don't seem interested or to care," said Fuhr. The problem for Fuhr is a spelling mistake in his name on the gun licence. "This registration system was a makeshift program for people who can't pass kindergarten," said Fuhr. "Can't these people read?" Fuhr said he spelled his name correctly on the registration form, which was compared for accuracy with his driver's licence, but was sent a gun licence with the last name "Fuhtr." When told of Fuhr's situation Canadian Firearms Centre spokesman David Austin said he would forward Fuhr's problem on to a customer service representative personally. "It should be right on his licence and right in our computer," said Austin. "We have customer service people here who can sort this out for him just like they did for the last guy." The last guy Austin is referring to is Paul Krawchuck. Last week, The Sun reported Krawchuk was having problems removing guns registered to his name that he didn't own. Like Fuhr, Krawchuk called the Canadian Firearms Centre two times before contacting The Sun. Both problems were looked into, after Austin was informed. Minutes after The Sun notified Austin yesterday of Fuhr's problem, Fuhr received a phone call from the centre offering to correct the problem at his convenience. "I've never seen anyone bend over backwards so fast. I can't believe it," said Fuhr. "For 1 1/2 years I've been arguing with them. It's crazy."


"15. Accuracy of information is essential to support police and reduce risks to public safety. However, there are a number of reasons to question the quality of the data in the Canadian Firearms Information System (CFIS).
16. The audit expressed concerns about the data in CFIS as a result of the Centre processing incomplete registrations from firearm owners before a statutory deadline, not validating information against other federal or provincial databases, and not confirming data transferred from the previous Restricted Weapon Registration System (about half of the 1.2 million restricted weapons in RWRS had not been re-registered). The rate of undeliverable mail resulting from wrong addresses has ranged from 7 to 23%, depending on the type of notice being sent. Verifications at the time of firearm transfers have shown that the firearm’s make, serial number and action (e.g., bolt action or semi-automatic) has been wrong 12%, 3% and 9% of the time, respectively. There may also be errors in an owner’s name or date of birth, and potential duplicate registration certificates. Lastly, the Centre did not know the status of 62% of the firearms for which registration certificates were revoked between July and October 2005.
18. The Committee is very concerned about the problems contained in the Canadian Firearms Information System. The data quality issues are quite extensive and cannot be easily fixed. It will be a major administrative hurdle to correct the data and the cost may be prohibitive. The system is useful only insofar as the data it contains is reliable and accurate. Inaccurate information could compromise the safety of the police officers who rely upon the system. While the Committee was told that the RCMP has a team working every day on the data quality issue, the Committee would like more information and greater assurance that the problems are being resolved."
"
-- Sheila Fraser, 2006 May Status Report of the Auditor General of Canada, Chapter 4—Canadian Firearms Program
http://cmte.parl.gc.ca/Content/HOC/committee/391/pacp/reports/rp2560006/391_PACP_Rpt10/391_PACP_Rpt10-e.pdf

RangeBob
11-10-2014, 12:49 AM
CPIC is broken down into four data banks: Investigative, Identification, Intelligence and Ancillary[5] which contain information on:

- Vehicles/marine

- Stolen or abandoned vehicles/boats
- Persons

- Wanted persons
- People who are accused of crime(s)
- People on probation or parolees
- Special Interest Police (SIP)
- Judicial orders
- Access to the Offender Management System of Correctional Service of Canada
- Missing persons
- Stolen property
- Dental characteristics
- Canadian Firearms Registry of the Canadian Firearms Program
- Wandering Persons Registry

- Alzheimer's disease patients who register with the Alzheimer Society of Canada in case they go missing
- CPIC criminal surveillance

- Criminal intelligence gathered across the country
- Criminal Record Synopsis

- Condensed information about a person's criminal record

Local, municipal and provincial police services in Canada, as well as federal law enforcement agencies such as the Canada Border Services Agency and Military Police maintain their own local records in addition to CPIC records.

-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Police_Information_Centre



CPIC is but one of many applications that are protected on the NPSN (National Police Service Network) and attacks on the network cannot be broken down as to which application is the intent of the attack. In general, attacks are to gain access through the protective measures, and from there to 'look around' for opportunities as to where the attacker 'can go'. Therefore there are no stats that are collected that would indicate where any attacks are directed with the NPSN
-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Firearms_Registry