PM Vows `Total' Handgun Ban

Posted on Thursday, December 08 at 07:42 by jensonj
Less than a month ago, Martin stood at the side of Toronto Mayor David Miller in the Jane and Finch area and declared: "We're going to take handguns out of our communities." Since then, a government plan to crack down on gun crime has now become a policy plank in the Liberal campaign platform for the Jan. 23 vote. Of the 75 homicides in Toronto this year, 50 have been committed with handguns. Police estimate half have been committed with handguns illegally smuggled into Canada, and a good portion of the others were committed with stolen weapons. Gun-control advocates have said that any clampdown on handguns, then, must also deal with border-tightening measures and gun theft, not simply extended bans. With Martin heading to the border city of Windsor tomorrow, where crimes involving firearms are also a major concern, it's largely expected that his anti-gun platform will contain some measures to address the smuggling problem as well. Handguns are already largely prohibited in Canada, in the wake of a law that came into effect in 1998, banning all .22- and .32-calibre handguns with a barrel length less than 105 millimetres. But there were big exceptions — collectors, sports shooters and many previous owners were allowed to hang on to their handguns. There are currently estimated to be about 300,000 weapons in Canada. Liberal sources were not releasing details of the proposed ban, but it is clearly aimed at locking support in urban areas such as Toronto where the party is already ahead of the Conservatives and New Democrats. What it does to the Liberals' hopes in more rural areas or the West however, where gun control is more controversial, remains to be seen. In terms of a "total ban," as it's billed, the tighter handgun controls could include: Even greater restrictions on who is allowed to own handguns, with fewer exceptions. A ban on the sale of handguns, as Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant has been discussing. An extension of measures to encompass even more weapons under the ban. Conservatives have not unveiled their own gun-crime platform yet in this campaign, but it's not expected to include any ban. Instead, Tory sources have told the Star's Sean Gordon that the party will focus on stiffer mandatory sentences, consecutive sentencing for offenders and new laws to cover the use of firearms in other offences. The NDP is expected to focus on border-control measures in its platform and better ways of getting at the root causes of gang and gun crime in communities. Full Article: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_PrintFriendly&c=Article&cid=1133995815725&call_pageid=968332188492

Note: http://www.thestar.com/...

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. by avatar Jesse
    Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:52 pm
    Really, we already have sufficient gun control legislation; handguns are not exactly easy to get. The NDP are right to be trying to address the root causes of crime and gang violence; we've seen it again and again; total prohibition doesn't work. Criminals will still manage to get guns, no matter how many times you declare them illegal. Let's try to find the reasons that people are *using* guns.

    ---
    Your mantra has been your opinions are stifled due to their contrary nature, when they are actually stifled for being without perceivable foundation.

  2. Thu Dec 08, 2005 7:14 pm
    I had no issues with banning assault weapons, and I even supported the concept of the gun registry (the cost of it it obscene but the purpose is fine). However, a ban on handguns is wrongheaded and enormously stupid. It is a political stunt generated by the Liberals. Wasn't it them that said half of the guns used in crimes came from the US not more than a couple of months ago? How will this solve that problem? It won't. Criminals won't register their guns, they won't turn in their guns and the Liberals won't have a valid plan for stopping smuggling (unless they backtrack yet again and agree to arm customs agents, inspect more vehicles or install better scanners at crossings and assign Mounties to the border crossings to chase down people who run the border checks).

    This also plays right into the hands of all the registry opponents that said that it would be used to confiscate legally obtained weapons. Watch the numbers of people willing to register their long rifles plummet.

  3. Thu Dec 08, 2005 7:55 pm
    Banning the importation of handguns from the US would be needed to accomplish a reduction.

    Possessing one would then be "de facto" proof of illigal importation as well as possession.

    Enforcement of this would be a huge task for Canada Customs, at all border crossings.

    I guess we have to agree that because of human depravity, not all criminal activity can be stopped. It can only be limited.

  4. by avatar Jesse
    Thu Dec 08, 2005 8:24 pm
    Exactly; any attempt to stomp out any part of human nature is doomed to failure.

    Does it seem to anyone else like Harper and Martin are just fishing for hot-button issues, trying various things until one catches? Do they have any idea what Canadians are actually concerned about?

    ---
    Your mantra has been your opinions are stifled due to their contrary nature, when they are actually stifled for being without perceivable foundation.

  5. Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:07 am
    Here is my idea of gun control. Mandatory minimum sentences for crimes committed with a firearm or replica. Say, perhaps, life in prison?
    That would probably make most people think twice.
    Of course, there would be grey areas to sort out - like using a gun in a situation of self defense.

  6. Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:12 am
    Here is one better and stops it permanently; execute anyone in possession of a handgun without a permit!

  7. Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:31 am
    Once again, the Liberals are seeking to solve crime by further intrusions into the lives of law-abiding citizens instead of punishing criminals. It's like banning matches while giving light sentences to arsonists.

    People should be help accountable for their *own* actions, and treated like responsible adults until they prove that they do not deserve such consideration.

    And if the state is not going to protect the rights of individuals to their lives and property, then the basic social contract on which all criminal law is based is rendered null and void. As members of a civilized society, we surrendered our right to personal retribution in exchange for protection by the state.

    To those who say that criminal justice should not based on punishment, I say go to hell! Punishment *has* to be part of the system. People have to be held accountable for their actions, and society has to feel that an offender has been punished for his actions.

    That's the problem with the whole "root causes" concept. It ignores individual responsibility, and gives anyone who perceives of themselves as "disadvantaged" the freedom to violate the rights of others who they consider "privileged", and thus fair game.

    Liberals have a real soft spot for criminals. I hope the electorate, most of whom own property and wish to feel safe when walking down the street, keeps that in mind.

  8. Fri Dec 09, 2005 1:28 am
    Actually, that IS the purpose of the registry. Government is afraid of an armed citizenry as they tend to resist when the dictators take over. Why do you think the right to bear arms is in the American constitution? Once the brits realized the americans were getting restless, they started trying to confiscate weapons "For your own safety".

    Hitler did the same in Germany, as did many south american dictators. Always for people's safety of course...

  9. Fri Dec 09, 2005 1:43 am
    Here is something I fail to understand: A majority of the citizens in Canada & the U.S. are law-abiding citizens. Most gun crimes are committed by criminals, or at least a minority of the population. Why pass gun legislation that dramatically affects law-abiding citizens, while letting the criminals off the hook? When will criminals start obeying the old laws, let alone the new ones? Those in power can easily obtain a conceal-carry gun permits. They can also afford to protect themselves and their families at home, with sophisticated security systems, security guards etc. So then, once again, the common man is thrown to the mercy, (or lack of it) of the wolves!

  10. Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:04 am
    Y'know, you guys better watch out. This seems awful right wing to be on this site.

  11. by RPW
    Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:56 am
    <blockquote> Let's try to find the reasons that people are *using* guns. </blockquote> DRUGS! <p>---<br>RickW

  12. Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:06 am
    Yea, it seems it's usually the Anon's that scream we're a left wing site, isn't it.


    ---
    "If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill

  13. Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:01 am
    >>Exactly; any attempt to stomp out any part of human nature is doomed to failure. <<

    Sorry Jesse, but I lost what you mean here. Hopefully you are not suggesting "murder" as human nature or the attempt to "stomp" it, is futile..

  14. Fri Dec 09, 2005 5:29 am
    Ahh sarcasm...SO constructive!



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news