"Callous activists exploit massacre"
A few days ago I was searching Google.Ca News for the latest scoop on the gun control debate sparked by the recent shooting deaths of four Mounties in Alberta, and found this logic-free editorial from the March 10 edition of the Toronto Star. It is titled, "Callous activists exploit massacre" or as I like to interpret it, "Canadians foolishly attempt to learn from experience." Excerpt:
exploiting this tragedy taking this opportunity to assure us all that, despite an obvious failure of the gun registry and drug laws, a failure that, by the way, no one should use to further their own goals, and despite the fact that the gun registry doesn't work, the gun registry works. Also, don't be tempted to learn anything from this tragedy.
Tragedies all too often draw out activists who callously use the events to push their own political agendas. Sadly, the murder of four Mounties in Alberta last week has been no exception.The author, whoever she is (I'm just gonna assume it was written by a woman), goes on to take issue not only with (predictably) the anti-gun registry folks, but also with the pro-marijuana legalization crowd, and, surprisingly, a group that wants to impose stiffer penalties for drug violations.
So what do the reprehensible acts of one unstable man have to do with marijuana laws and the gun registry? Despite what the lobbies would have us believe, not very much.So what do the the reprehensible acts of one illicit marijuana grower who used guns to murder people have to do with marijuana laws and the gun registry? Despite what your common sense would have you believe, not much.
...one violent incident should not be allowed to undo the gun registry.However, one violent incident is allowed to bring about tough gun control laws.
Despite huge cost overruns, there is ample evidence the registry is working. Nearly 90 per cent of guns in Canada are now registered.Whether the gun registry is actually working depends on your criterion for success. The author clues us in on what this criterion is whilst simultaneously admitting the real goal of the registry. Canadians were sold on the idea of a gun registry that was to serve as a crime-solving tool -- something it has failed utterly to do. However, the real point of the registry had nothing to do with crime, it was simply an excuse to get everyone registered; and as the author helpfully informs us, mission (nearly) accomplished. Phase 2: confiscation.
Police around the country consult the database nearly 2,000 times a day and the vast majority of police chiefs support the registry.You don't say. Yet none of this activity has, to my knowledge, resulted in the solving of one single gun crime. Furthermore, nearly 2,000 consultations a day adds up to around 700,000 consultations a year. Does this mean there are 700,000 instances of guns being used in crimes across Canada?? Crimes that Canada's tough gun control laws were supposed to prevent?? If this isn't the case, then for what insidious purpose is the registry being consulted so often? Either way, this should be raising red flags all over the place.
It is unclear if Roszko's guns were registered. But no one ever said the database would eliminate all violent crime.But a lot of people did say that the database would help prevent and/or solve at least some violent crime, and it hasn't.
And for every heinous act like last week's police killings, how many more tragedies has the gun registry averted?Answer: NONE. And I have a better question: how many more tragedies could be averted if Canadians were permitted to carry guns?
No law will ever prevent all evil. And this was clearly just that — the actions of a violent, sick man. That's why the gun and drug lobbies should be taken to task for exploiting this tragedy to further their own goals.Which is why the author is
Canadians should stop pointing fingers and concentrate on the task of mourning the deaths of four young officers cut down in their prime.Which, I'm sure, the author did just as soon as she was done pointing her finger at all those jerks who were pointing fingers.