Political Maneuvering As Gang Control

This is not new information, it is well recognized that immigrants bring the culture of the old country with them. In the vast majority of cases and customs this is not a problem and in many cases it is a positive addition to Canadian society. Regrettably, the few bad apples in the immigrant community also bring their culture and Jamaican gang culture is notorious for its extreme anyone, anywhere violence. Unfortunately, instead of dealing with the problem, the government of Premier Dalton McGuinty would rather play politics. This is understandable: actually addressing this gang problem is virtually guaranteed to bring a storm of protest from the Politically Correct and political activists intent on creating an identity politics power base. The fact that Jamaican immigrants, all too familiar with Jamaican gang culture, are not in favor of these gangs carries less political weight. Indeed, it has become painfully obvious that the McGuinty administration has little faith in the sense and sensibilities of immigrants in general or the Jamaican community in particular. His policies assume that these communities are incapable of distinguishing between a crackdown on criminal gangs and a crackdown on the community. Not having the political courage to address the actual problem the McGuinty administration has generated a number of “safe” surrogates. The first of these was shifting the focus from gangs to guns. Inanimate object, millions of which are present in Canada, suddenly became the “cause” of all the trouble. Just to make sure all the blame went elsewhere they then framed the issue as “American guns” which happily, are beyond their administration's jurisdiction and control. Allying himself with PM Paul Martin, Toronto Mayor David Miller and Toronto police chief Bill Blair, he claimed that 50% of the guns on Toronto's streets were from the US. When it was revealed that this figure was simply pulled from the air, McGuinty quickly dropped the matter. With the failure of the American excuse the premier switched tactics and gun collectors became the new villains. Handguns, the inanimate “cause” of the problem would be banned and confiscated. The new villain would now be the “infamous gun collector.” Happily for Premier McGuinty there have been a number of high profile gun thefts from gun collectors to support this new agenda. Even more happily, this turn of events has some political payoffs. The McGuinty administration can now blame the Conservatives for denying them jurisdiction to solve the problem, which shifts the blame to the Feds and the “gun lobby.” They can also use each new shooting and theft to develop a “wedge issue” for the Liberals to use. Best of all, the blame can be pointed at easy to target law-abiding gun owners rather than at the “Politically Incorrect target” of black gangs. Feel Good Laws A small fly in this political ointment is the fact that these gun thefts are traceable to previous “feel good” laws. In 1994, Premier Bob Rae's NDP responded to the on-duty death of Const. Baylis with Bill 181 making Ontario the toughest place in North America to buy ammunition. The new law required all ammunition retailers to keep records of all transactions -- the name and age of the purchaser, their address and the type and quantity of ammunition purchased. Unfortunately, there were no security arrangements for these purchase books and they became a convenient shopping list for gangs seeking guns. There was never the slightest possibility that this law would have prevented the Constable's death or any other crime. Instead this “feel good” law took the politically easy route of targeting gun owners while ignored criminals. It also paved the way for Premier McGuinty to propose another “feel good” law. This is not to say that this agenda is without its charms, we can admire the adroit political maneuvering, the clever construction of a wedge issue, the nuanced shifting of responsibility (if only they would let us do it) and the exquisite tap dance through a political correctness minefield. All jolly good politics, assuming that is, that we don't mind the gangs or the dead bodies. However, there still remains the important question. Will the policy work? Will the banning of handguns owned by Canadians prevent criminal gangs from getting guns or using them? Gun Numbers We can begin by examining official reports to find where the criminal guns are coming from. Examining official report we find: Peel Regional Police, Project Gun Runner Report (December, 1994): 14% of firearms used in crime in Toronto had been registered; Toronto Police Services (Annual Report for 2000): 2% of the firearms came from Canadian owners. Toronto Police Services Board Report (January 22, 2004): 9% of came from lawful Canadian owners. Statistics Canada (Homicide Report for 2004): 16% of the firearms used in homicide were in the registry. Toronto Police Service report (December 1, 2005): 16% of handguns were stolen from law-abiding Canadian owners. These figures for stolen guns are a far cry from the 50% figure used by Premier McGuinty and Mayor Miller. They also raise another numbers problem. The number of actual crime guns is quiet low, for example the Toronto 2004 report is based on 183 firearms and the 2005 report is based on 214 recovered handguns. This emphasizes how few guns gangs really need. For all of Toronto we are talking about a few hundred or a few thousand. How likely is it that the government will be able to prevent organized gangs from acquiring such small numbers of guns? Even if we had a magic spell to make all Canadian handguns disappear; how hard would it be for gangs to bring these small quantities in from the US. Even if our magic spell extended to the US, eliminating all handguns there, how would this stop gangs who bring in drugs by the ton from SE Asia and Afghanistan from acquiring the small numbers actually needed? Other Gun Bans We can also address the question of “will it work?” by examining the results of gun bans in other jurisdictions. New York, Washington DC and Chicago have had total handgun bans in effect for decades, yet compete for the title of gun crime capital of the US.; The British government's increasing restrictions, leading to an absolute ban on handguns in 1997, did not reduce crime. Gun crime in England and Wales nearly doubled in the four years from 1998 to 2003 and homicide rates jumped 50% between 1990 and 2000; Australia instituted strict gun control in 1996 only to find that violent crime rates increased by 32% from 1997 to 2002 (on average from 1995), and armed-robbery rates increased 74 %; Jamaica passed a total ban on firearms in 1970 with special gun courts where life sentences were handed out for the possession of a single bullet. In 2000 Jamaica had a homicide rates of 31.60 per 100,000 population (Canada rate 1.99, United States rate 8.95) In 2000 the American, Center for Disease Control commissioned a two year study which systematic reviewed the scientific literature to determine the effectiveness of firearms laws. They were unable to find any clear scientific proof that firearm bans prevented gun related violence. Totally absent from the debate are the benefits of gun ownership including handgun ownership. A curious omission considering the Library of Parliament did a major study "THE BENEFITS OF FIREARMS OWNERSHIP in April 2004. The study addressed both self-defense and the deterrent effect of gun ownership on crime rates. The Attorney General's New Approach to Crime Following the lead of the Premier, Ontario's Attorney General Michael Bryant also proposed a provincial handgun ban. He stated that "Nobody needs to have a handgun in their house and nobody should because of the dangers caused even by safe storage of these weapons of human misery.” The Attorney General also stated that "the average citizen simply cannot safely store a handgun" and noted that no matter what lengths collectors go to store their weapons, thieves are going to steal them and sell them on the street to the highest bidder. “I think the time for handgun collections in people's homes have come and gone," the Attorney General said. "maybe there was a time when this was safe, but no longer.” It is seldom that one hears the head of law enforcement for a province make such an open and complete confession of absolute defeat. The citizens of Ontario are no longer safe in their homes, nor are their possessions and that is now the permanent state of things. There is nothing the “average citizen” can do about it either. Thieves will steal them, thieves will sell them and there is nothing he or the police can do about it. Accordingly, the only possible solution is to remove the property of the law abiding. Unable to even contemplate eradicating the gangs Bryant shifts his efforts to the law-abiding to prevent theft by confiscating what the thieves want to steal. It is a breathtaking admission of the failure of political will. A complete abandonment of any hope for effective governance and all in the face of a few hundred gang members. One wonders if this brilliant new approach will be applied to other crime problems like bank robbery, car theft and the heisting of women's jewelry. Premier McGuinty also submits to the superior will of the gangs. He avoids any blame for his total abdication of responsibility for law and order by shifting the blame onto Canada's supposed gun culture. Stating that "I think in an ideal world we'd have a national gun culture which was opposed to handguns everywhere, but failing that, then let us run with it here in the province of Ontario.” The true nature of the problem is thus defined. It is the law abiding, licensed, registered, regulated gun owner and their lamentable reluctance to give up their traditional rights to lawful activities and property. As for the gangs, they seem to have vanished entirely. If only getting violent drug gangs off the streets of Toronto was as easy as getting them off Premier McGuinty's political agenda. [Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on February 14, 2006]