Drizzt
Member
Forget the price tag: Crack down on guns
Thomas S. Axworthy says gun registry is working and is needed to fight gangs
Gun-related violence stalks the land. Last Thursday, four Mounties were killed in central Alberta, the force's biggest loss of life in 120 years. In our major cities hardly a week goes by without gang-related shootings. In one of his last press conferences as Toronto police chief before becoming Ontario's Commissioner of Emergency Management, Julian Fantino urged the federal government to increase the mandatory minimum sentence for anyone caught using a gun in a serious crime to 10 years from the current four years.
Fantino's blast in response to a weekend disrupted by five separate shootings may not be the best policy, but it highlights what should be a central issue for the Prime Minister, the premier and the mayor — how best to respond to urban violence.
Robert Kennedy, a mythic progressive hero, made crime a centrepiece of his campaign for the presidency in 1968. When criticized by liberals for running on "law and order," Kennedy lashed back that it was the poor who suffered most from violence and that fear of crime was one of the major determinants to improving neighbourhoods.
What was evident in the 1960s is even more true today: Violent gang warfare is on the rise and it must be stopped. To have livable cities, they must be safe and we should start by strengthening, not avoiding gun control.
The Liberal party is meeting at a convention this weekend and one of its prominent achievements that should be defended is the gun registry program.
Initiated by Allan Rock and implemented by Anne McLellan, the registry has been a stunning success, yet it has been given terrible press. Liberals have allowed the Conservatives to define the debate and it is time to retake the high ground.
First, the program is working: 90 per cent of gun owners and more than 6 million firearms have been registered. Police forces in Canada use the registration data an average of 2,600 times a day, one reason why the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police supports the law strongly. Rock's 1995 legislation has only recently been fully implemented, but there is little doubt stronger controls over rifles and shotguns are working.
Firearms were the most frequently used weapon to kill women in spousal homicides between 1974 and 2000, but homicides have decreased dramatically. This is because the licensing and screening process prevents potential violence: Two referees must sign an application form stating that they know of no reason why the applicant should not have a gun. Current and former spouses are notified to give them a chance to raise concern if safety is an issue, and the registry allows police to check if there is a gun on the premises before they make a call. These are common sense measures that work.
Most of the criticisms have been about the cost of the system — "a billion-dollar overrun" is the usual grist of the mill. It is true that the gun registry program costs $100 million per year to run, but so what? It costs $125 million per year to run the passport office. Both duties are labour intensive. Saving lives and helping the police do their job better for $100 million per year is a bargain. The lesson for progressives is never let your opposition define the issue. A $1 billion spent over 10 years is hardly an eye-popping figure.
But as Fantino has stated, more must be done. The special problem is handguns, especially handguns smuggled in from the United States. Like Britain, Canada should ban handguns altogether. At a minimum, we should be much tougher with Americans bringing guns over the border. The U.S is quick to ask Canada to strengthen our border measures against terrorists: We should ask them to do the same with handguns.
The fine for bringing guns into Canada is only $500 — not much of a deterrent.
Lastly, as Kennedy knew, the root cause of violence is poverty and deprivation. We must be tough on crime but also on the causes of crime.
Housing, childcare, neighbourhood development and community policing are valuable in themselves but have the added benefit of preventing crime. Guns increase the lethality of violence and violence grows from human misery. Like Kennedy, we must say no to guns and no to poverty.
Thomas S. Axworthy is chairman of the Centre for the Study of Democracy, Queen's University.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...163&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795
Thomas S. Axworthy says gun registry is working and is needed to fight gangs
Gun-related violence stalks the land. Last Thursday, four Mounties were killed in central Alberta, the force's biggest loss of life in 120 years. In our major cities hardly a week goes by without gang-related shootings. In one of his last press conferences as Toronto police chief before becoming Ontario's Commissioner of Emergency Management, Julian Fantino urged the federal government to increase the mandatory minimum sentence for anyone caught using a gun in a serious crime to 10 years from the current four years.
Fantino's blast in response to a weekend disrupted by five separate shootings may not be the best policy, but it highlights what should be a central issue for the Prime Minister, the premier and the mayor — how best to respond to urban violence.
Robert Kennedy, a mythic progressive hero, made crime a centrepiece of his campaign for the presidency in 1968. When criticized by liberals for running on "law and order," Kennedy lashed back that it was the poor who suffered most from violence and that fear of crime was one of the major determinants to improving neighbourhoods.
What was evident in the 1960s is even more true today: Violent gang warfare is on the rise and it must be stopped. To have livable cities, they must be safe and we should start by strengthening, not avoiding gun control.
The Liberal party is meeting at a convention this weekend and one of its prominent achievements that should be defended is the gun registry program.
Initiated by Allan Rock and implemented by Anne McLellan, the registry has been a stunning success, yet it has been given terrible press. Liberals have allowed the Conservatives to define the debate and it is time to retake the high ground.
First, the program is working: 90 per cent of gun owners and more than 6 million firearms have been registered. Police forces in Canada use the registration data an average of 2,600 times a day, one reason why the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police supports the law strongly. Rock's 1995 legislation has only recently been fully implemented, but there is little doubt stronger controls over rifles and shotguns are working.
Firearms were the most frequently used weapon to kill women in spousal homicides between 1974 and 2000, but homicides have decreased dramatically. This is because the licensing and screening process prevents potential violence: Two referees must sign an application form stating that they know of no reason why the applicant should not have a gun. Current and former spouses are notified to give them a chance to raise concern if safety is an issue, and the registry allows police to check if there is a gun on the premises before they make a call. These are common sense measures that work.
Most of the criticisms have been about the cost of the system — "a billion-dollar overrun" is the usual grist of the mill. It is true that the gun registry program costs $100 million per year to run, but so what? It costs $125 million per year to run the passport office. Both duties are labour intensive. Saving lives and helping the police do their job better for $100 million per year is a bargain. The lesson for progressives is never let your opposition define the issue. A $1 billion spent over 10 years is hardly an eye-popping figure.
But as Fantino has stated, more must be done. The special problem is handguns, especially handguns smuggled in from the United States. Like Britain, Canada should ban handguns altogether. At a minimum, we should be much tougher with Americans bringing guns over the border. The U.S is quick to ask Canada to strengthen our border measures against terrorists: We should ask them to do the same with handguns.
The fine for bringing guns into Canada is only $500 — not much of a deterrent.
Lastly, as Kennedy knew, the root cause of violence is poverty and deprivation. We must be tough on crime but also on the causes of crime.
Housing, childcare, neighbourhood development and community policing are valuable in themselves but have the added benefit of preventing crime. Guns increase the lethality of violence and violence grows from human misery. Like Kennedy, we must say no to guns and no to poverty.
Thomas S. Axworthy is chairman of the Centre for the Study of Democracy, Queen's University.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...163&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795
